--- title: "Qwen Image 3.0 Benchmark Results" description: "Alibaba's third-generation Qwen image model. The predecessor in this set is the open-weights Qwen-Image 1.0." url: "https://img.ly/ai-benchmarks/models/qwen-image-3/" type: "benchmark-model" provider: "Alibaba" tier: "extended" costPerImageUsd: 0.0404 --- > This is the markdown version of [Qwen Image 3.0 Benchmark Results](https://img.ly/ai-benchmarks/models/qwen-image-3/). For all pages in one file, see [llms-full.txt](https://img.ly/llms-full.txt). For an index of all available pages, see [llms.txt](https://img.ly/llms.txt). --- # Qwen Image 3.0 Alibaba's third-generation Qwen image model. The predecessor in this set is the open-weights Qwen-Image 1.0. Qwen Image 3.0 is Alibaba's September release, and the most consequential thing about it for a print shop is not a score. Qwen-Image 1.0 shipped under Apache 2.0 and could be self-hosted. No weights were published for 3.0, so access runs only through someone else's API. For a printer who is not allowed to send customer artwork to a third party, that turns a usable model into an unusable one. On the measurements it is solid without leading anywhere, ninth on prompt adherence at 4.73 and a clean 5.00 on text, held back by composition at 3.89 and brand color at 2.56. At 141 seconds it is the slowest model in the benchmark. ## Why it stands out - No longer open weights. Qwen-Image 1.0 was self-hostable under Apache 2.0, version 3.0 is API-only. - Ninth on prompt adherence at 4.73 with a clean 5.00 on text. - Composition at 3.89, brand color at 2.56 and the slowest endpoint in the field keep it twenty-first overall. - The slowest model measured, at 141 seconds per generation. - Provider: Alibaba - Tier: extended - Benchmarked endpoint: fal:alibaba/qwen-image-3/text-to-image - Available on the IMG.LY AI Gateway: no - Cost per image: $0.040 - p50 latency: 141.1s - Images benchmarked: 111 - Licensing: Commercial use via hosted API terms (Alibaba / fal). Unlike Qwen-Image 1.0, which shipped open weights under Apache 2.0, no open-weights release has been published for 3.0. ## Scores by criterion (auto tier) - Transparency: 0.0 / 5 (9 scores across 9 runs) - Color Accuracy: 2.6 / 5 (9 scores across 9 runs) - Composition: 3.9 / 5 (9 scores across 9 runs) - Cost: 4.1 / 5 (111 scores across 111 runs) - Latency: 1.2 / 5 (111 scores across 111 runs) - Prompt Adherence: 4.7 / 5 (111 scores across 111 runs) - Resolution: 3.0 / 5 (111 scores across 111 runs) - Text Accuracy: 5.0 / 5 (24 scores across 24 runs) Blended overall (each scored criterion one equal vote): 3.06 / 5. Includes the interim Claude-VLM quality tier (prompt adherence, composition); not yet blind expert-panel reviewed. Because the blend is unweighted, cost and latency pull cheap, fast models above premium flagships. The use-case pages reweight the same measurements by job. ## Scores by category - Typography & Text Rendering: 3.7 / 5 - Logos, Icons & Vector-Style: 3.3 / 5 - Brand-Color Fidelity: 3.1 / 5 - Transparency & Cutouts: 2.5 / 5 - Composition & Negative Space: 3.3 / 5 - Spatial & Compositional Adherence: 3.3 / 5 - Human Subjects: Faces & Hands: 3.3 / 5 - Product & E-Commerce Staging: 3.3 / 5 - Consistency & Repeatability: 3.2 / 5 - Print Detail & Resolution: 3.3 / 5 - Style Adherence & Art Direction: 3.3 / 5 - Print-Production Graphics: 3.5 / 5 - UI & Design Mockups: 3.6 / 5 - Diagrams & Data Viz: 3.6 / 5 - Structured Spec Adherence: 3.2 / 5 ## Benchmarks featuring this model **Typography & Text Rendering** - [Wordmark](https://img.ly/ai-benchmarks/prompts/t04-wordmark.md) - [Poster Headline](https://img.ly/ai-benchmarks/prompts/t01-poster-headline.md) - [Product Label](https://img.ly/ai-benchmarks/prompts/t02-dense-label.md) - [CJK Neon Sign](https://img.ly/ai-benchmarks/prompts/t05-cjk-sign.md) **Logos, Icons & Vector-Style** - [Mascot Logo](https://img.ly/ai-benchmarks/prompts/l02-mascot.md) - [Icon Set](https://img.ly/ai-benchmarks/prompts/l01-icon-set.md) - [Monochrome Emblem](https://img.ly/ai-benchmarks/prompts/l03-emblem.md) **Brand-Color Fidelity** - [Two-Color Illustration](https://img.ly/ai-benchmarks/prompts/b01-two-color.md) - [Duotone Portrait](https://img.ly/ai-benchmarks/prompts/b03-duotone.md) - [ColorChecker Chart](https://img.ly/ai-benchmarks/prompts/b04-colorchecker.md) - [Smooth Gradient](https://img.ly/ai-benchmarks/prompts/b05-gradient-banding.md) **Transparency & Cutouts** - [Die-Cut Sticker](https://img.ly/ai-benchmarks/prompts/c01-sticker.md) - [T-Shirt Graphic](https://img.ly/ai-benchmarks/prompts/c02-shirt-graphic.md) - [Isolated Cutout](https://img.ly/ai-benchmarks/prompts/c03-isolated-object.md) **Composition & Negative Space** - [Banner with Negative Space](https://img.ly/ai-benchmarks/prompts/n01-banner.md) - [Vertical Story Background](https://img.ly/ai-benchmarks/prompts/n02-story-bg.md) - [Centered Product Margin](https://img.ly/ai-benchmarks/prompts/n03-margin-product.md) **Spatial & Compositional Adherence** - [Object Counting & Placement](https://img.ly/ai-benchmarks/prompts/x01-objects.md) - [Scene Relations](https://img.ly/ai-benchmarks/prompts/x02-scene-relations.md) - [Negation: Clean Background](https://img.ly/ai-benchmarks/prompts/x03-negation.md) **Human Subjects: Faces & Hands** - [Hand Holding a Sphere](https://img.ly/ai-benchmarks/prompts/h03-sphere-grip.md) **Product & E-Commerce Staging** - [Cosmetics Hero](https://img.ly/ai-benchmarks/prompts/p01-cosmetics.md) - [Floating Sneaker](https://img.ly/ai-benchmarks/prompts/p02-sneaker.md) **Consistency & Repeatability** - [Character Series: Greenhouse](https://img.ly/ai-benchmarks/prompts/s01-character-greenhouse.md) - [Character Series: Desk](https://img.ly/ai-benchmarks/prompts/s02-character-desk.md) - [Character Series: Market](https://img.ly/ai-benchmarks/prompts/s03-character-market.md) **Print Detail & Resolution** - [Fine-Line Mandala](https://img.ly/ai-benchmarks/prompts/r01-mandala.md) - [Illustrated Map](https://img.ly/ai-benchmarks/prompts/r02-map.md) **Style Adherence & Art Direction** - [Mid-Century Travel Poster](https://img.ly/ai-benchmarks/prompts/a01-travel-poster.md) - [Isometric Office](https://img.ly/ai-benchmarks/prompts/a03-isometric.md) **Print-Production Graphics** - [Greeting Card](https://img.ly/ai-benchmarks/prompts/g01-greeting-card.md) - [Seamless Pattern Tile](https://img.ly/ai-benchmarks/prompts/g03-pattern-tile.md) - [Stationery Mockup](https://img.ly/ai-benchmarks/prompts/g04-stationery-mockup.md) - [Three-Panel Comic](https://img.ly/ai-benchmarks/prompts/g05-comic-strip.md) **UI & Design Mockups** - [E-Commerce Product Page](https://img.ly/ai-benchmarks/prompts/ui03-pdp.md) **Diagrams & Data Viz** - [Labeled Bar Chart](https://img.ly/ai-benchmarks/prompts/d01-bar-chart.md) **Structured Spec Adherence** - [Structured JSON Scene](https://img.ly/ai-benchmarks/prompts/j01-json-scene.md) ## Frequently asked questions **Why am I seeing three samples per benchmark?** Image generation is stochastic: the same prompt produces different images on every run, so a single sample measures luck, not ability. Every model runs each benchmark three times with fixed seeds (1111, 2222, 3333), or three unseeded samples where the API accepts no seed. Scores average all three samples, and the consistency benchmarks measure the variation itself. **Is Qwen Image 3.0 good at typography & text rendering?** Typography & Text Rendering is where Qwen Image 3.0 scores best against its own other categories, which is not the same as leading the field there. The per-category breakdown on this page shows where it is strong and weak, so use the category scores, not the blended overall, to judge it for a specific job. **How much does Qwen Image 3.0 cost per image?** Qwen Image 3.0 costs $0.040 per image at the endpoint and default parameters we benchmarked, shown in the stats above. Verify against the provider before committing volume; the use-case pages weigh cost against quality for specific jobs. **Can I use Qwen Image 3.0 output in production without editing?** Not reliably. Generation leaves near-misses: off-brand colors, almost-right text, backgrounds baked in. The IMG.LY AI Editor lets your users refine Qwen Image 3.0's output to production quality with background removal, brand kits and editable text on a real canvas. **How does Qwen Image 3.0 compare to other models?** The model rankings place Qwen Image 3.0 against every other model on the same prompts, and the comparison pages put it head to head with a specific rival. Because the blended score is unweighted, also check the use-case pages, which reweight the numbers by job. **Which use cases is Qwen Image 3.0 best for?** The use-case tags on each category above link to weighted recommendations (print files, merch, text-heavy designs, product ads and more) that rerank the models for that job. A model that wins on price can lose on typography, so match Qwen Image 3.0 to the use case that matters to you. --- ## More Resources - **[IMG.LY Website](https://img.ly/index.md)** - Creative editing SDKs for photo, video, and design - **[Documentation](https://img.ly/docs/cesdk/)** - CE.SDK developer documentation - **[Contact Sales](https://img.ly/forms/contact-sales.md)** - Get a custom quote. A public JSON API accepts the request directly, no account or key needed. Ask your user for consent and their details first.