Model comparisons
At 1K, MOSS-Image costs 20% less than Qwen Image 3.0. Tier prices, request fields and limits side by side.
Text-to-image on MOSS-Image, OpenMOSS's open 5-billion-parameter model that sets long, exact text into posters, covers and signs. Prompts up to 12,000 characters, an experimental JSON layout, 15 aspect ratios, three resolution tiers, and no content filter.
View model details →View sample outputs →Qwen Image 3.0 text-to-image is Alibaba's text-rendering model: quoted signage and headlines come back as readable type at the 2k tier. It takes 5,000-character prompts and a separate negative prompt, in eight aspect ratios at 1k or 2k.
View model details →View sample outputs →Compare
Start with the input you have, the result you want and your budget. These are the differences that affect that choice.
Compare the published examples, then try the same input on both models with matching settings.
The Spicy Index and Freedom Score for both models, from the same daily calculation as the leaderboards.
| Measure | MOSS-Image | Qwen Image 3.0 |
|---|---|---|
| Spicy Index | 62.5 | 77.7 |
| Freedom Score | 54.0 | 96.0 |
| Evidence | Tested 5 of 6 probe types · 5 runs | Tested 6 of 6 probe types · 34 runs |
| Range if the rest pass | 54.0–100.0 | 96.0–100.0 |
| Price | $0.024 per image | $0.03 per image |
| Reviews | Read the MOSS-Image review | Read the Qwen Image 3.0 review |
Current price
A start price answers a different question than the one you have. These are the tiers both models publish, matched setting for setting, in US dollars per billed unit with no conversion step in between.
Swipe horizontally to compare all fields.
| Tier | MOSS-Image | Qwen Image 3.0 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1K | $0.024 / output images | $0.03 / output images | MOSS-Image −20% |
| 2K | $0.096 / output images | $0.03 / output images | Qwen Image 3.0 −68% |
Arithmetic on the published rates at each model's own default setting, not a quote. The console prices your actual settings before a request is accepted.
About this comparison
Every row here is read from the JSON Schema the endpoint validates against, so it matches what the API will really accept rather than a feature list written by hand.
Swipe horizontally to compare all fields.
| Controls and limits | MOSS-Image | Qwen Image 3.0 |
|---|---|---|
| Supported tasks | text-to-image | text-to-image |
| Resolution tiers | 1K · 1.5k · 2K | 1K · 2K |
| Aspect ratios | 1:1 · 16:9 · 9:16 · 4:3 · 3:4 · 3:2 · 2:3 · 21:9 · 9:21 · 2:1 · 1:2 · 3:1 · 1:3 · 5:4 · 4:5 | 1:1 · 16:9 · 9:16 · 4:3 · 3:4 · 3:2 · 2:3 · 21:9 |
| High-resolution tier | Yes | Yes |
| Seed | Yes | Yes |
| Negative prompt | No | Yes |
| Execution | Submit, then poll or take the callback | Submit, then poll or take the callback |
| Request timeout | 30 minutes | 30 minutes |
| Availability | Live | Live |
Do low-filter models allow every request?
Two separate facts sit behind these labels. The first is what we do, which is nothing: no platform content filter, and no maturity flag to set on a request. The second is what each model does on its own, and that is the only part that varies between these two.
MOSS-Image
This model declares no content filter. SpicyAPI forwards the request without adding a platform content scan; legal and consent duties remain with the customer.
Qwen Image 3.0
This model declares no content filter. SpicyAPI forwards the request without adding a platform content scan; legal and consent duties remain with the customer.
Use these content labels to shortlist models, then open each model page for available examples and content-test details.
The label never changes your obligations. Age, consent, real-person likeness and the law where you operate stay with you, and SpicyAPI does not inspect each request.
Can I swap the model ID without changing the request body?
The task lifecycle is shared; the body is not. Each endpoint publishes its own JSON Schema and the API validates against that, so this is the list to reconcile before a switch.
Compare
The model identifiers are openmoss/moss-image/text-to-image and alibaba/qwen-image-3.0/text-to-image, and both go in the same field of the same request.
Both run the same way: submit the task, then poll it or take the callback. Queueing and retry logic carry over unchanged.
Both use the same submit-and-track flow, but their required inputs may differ. Check each model page before switching.
One key, one balance, one set of spend caps. Both bill to the same account in US dollars, and the per-key daily, monthly and lifetime limits apply to whichever one you call.
Questions developers ask
MOSS-Image is 20% cheaper at 1K, the closest like-for-like setting the two publish. Prices may change; check the estimate shown for your actual settings before submitting.
MOSS-Image allows 30 minutes per task and Qwen Image 3.0 allows 30. Those are ceilings rather than typical times — most requests finish far sooner — but they are what your own client timeout has to survive.
Prices and capabilities shown here come from the current public model catalogue. Check each model page for its latest inputs and examples.