Alibaba
QwQ Plus
Qwen reasoning model for deliberate problem solving, math, and coding
- Context
- 131.1K
- Max output
- 8.2K
- Input / 1M
- $0.80
- Output / 1M
- $2.40
- Output speed
- —
Accepts
- Text input
Produces
- Text output
AI model comparison
Compare recorded price, context, output limits, speed, latency, capabilities, and input/output support. Every missing value stays visible, and unsourced benchmarks are excluded.
This QwQ Plus vs Gemini 1.5 Pro comparison is designed for teams choosing between two production model records, not for declaring a universal winner. QwQ Plus by Alibaba currently records 131.1K context, 8.2K maximum output, $0.80 input per 1M tokens, $2.40 output per 1M tokens. Gemini 1.5 Pro by Google records 2M context, 8.2K maximum output, $1.25 input per 1M tokens, $5.00 output per 1M tokens, 65 t/s recorded output speed, 0.90s recorded time to first token. The tables below separate documented capabilities, commercial limits, directory measurements, and source-linked benchmark evidence so you can see where the data is complete and where independent testing is still required.
Alibaba
Qwen reasoning model for deliberate problem solving, math, and coding
Accepts
Produces
Google's long-context multimodal model with up to 2M token windows.
Accepts
Produces
At a glance
This is a directional summary of the values recorded in this directory—not a universal quality verdict. Test the finalists on your own prompts before committing.
Where QwQ Plus leads in recorded data
Where Gemini 1.5 Pro leads in recorded data
Context capacity
Higher listed limit
QwQ Plus:131.1K
Gemini 1.5 Pro:2M
Gemini 1.5 Pro
Maximum output
Higher listed limit
QwQ Plus:8.2K
Gemini 1.5 Pro:8.2K
Same recorded value
Input price
Lower recorded price
QwQ Plus:$0.80
Gemini 1.5 Pro:$1.25
QwQ Plus
Output price
Lower recorded price
QwQ Plus:$2.40
Gemini 1.5 Pro:$5.00
QwQ Plus
Output speed
Higher recorded throughput
QwQ Plus:—
Gemini 1.5 Pro:65 t/s
No complete comparison
Time to first token
Lower recorded latency
QwQ Plus:—
Gemini 1.5 Pro:0.90s
No complete comparison
Intelligence Index
Higher directory index
QwQ Plus:—
Gemini 1.5 Pro:75.8
No complete comparison
Evidence
A score appears only when both records include a verified source. It is not treated as a universal ranking.
Specifications
| Specification | QwQ Plus | Gemini 1.5 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba | |
| Model family | qwen | Gemini 1.5 |
| Accepted inputs | text | text, image, audio, video |
| Produced outputs | text | text |
| Context window | 131.1K | 2MRecorded lead |
| Max output | 8.2K | 8.2K |
| Intelligence Index | — | 75.8 |
| Input price / 1M | $0.80Recorded lead | $1.25 |
| Output price / 1M | $2.40Recorded lead | $5.00 |
| Output speed | — | 65 t/s |
| Time to first token | — | 0.90s |
| Reasoning mode | Documented | Not documented |
| Tool calling | Documented | Documented |
| Image input | Not documented | Documented |
| Audio input | Not documented | Documented |
| Structured output | Not documented | Documented |
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Released | Mar 5, 2025 | May 14, 2024 |
Workload guidance
QwQ Plus currently leads on lower recorded input price, lower recorded output price. Gemini 1.5 Pro currently leads on larger context. Choose according to the constraints that matter to your workload, then run the same representative prompts against both models before making a production commitment. Neither the larger number nor the lower price is automatically the better choice: prompt quality, tool reliability, modality support, rate limits, data policy, and provider implementation can change the result. Use this page to build a shortlist, confirm current terms in the linked sources, and validate quality, latency, and cost with your own traffic.
Provenance
Prices and hosted performance can change. SyncDev records source references and clearly separates documented specifications from measured values; confirm commercial terms with the provider before deployment.
QwQ Plus
Alibaba · model record and recorded source
Gemini 1.5 Pro
Google · model record and recorded source
Choose any two approved model records and review them with the same evidence rules.