Qwen3 Embedding 0.6B vs Jina Embeddings v3

Detailed comparison between Qwen3 Embedding 0.6B and Jina Embeddings v3. See which embedding best meets your accuracy and performance needs. If you want to compare these models on your data, try Agentset.

Model Comparison

Jina Embeddings v3 takes the lead.

Both Qwen3 Embedding 0.6B and Jina Embeddings v3 are powerful embedding models designed to improve retrieval quality in RAG applications. However, their performance characteristics differ in important ways.

Why Jina Embeddings v3:

  • Jina Embeddings v3 delivers better accuracy (nDCG@10: 0.674 vs 0.656)
  • Qwen3 Embedding 0.6B is 199ms faster on average

Overview

Key metrics

ELO Rating

Overall ranking quality

Qwen3 Embedding 0.6B

1426

Jina Embeddings v3

1419

Win Rate

Head-to-head performance

Qwen3 Embedding 0.6B

35.7%

Jina Embeddings v3

34.6%

Accuracy (nDCG@10)

Ranking quality metric

Qwen3 Embedding 0.6B

0.656

Jina Embeddings v3

0.674

Average Latency

Response time

Qwen3 Embedding 0.6B

25ms

Jina Embeddings v3

223ms

Embedding Models Are Just One Piece of RAG

Agentset gives you a managed RAG pipeline with the top-ranked models and best practices baked in. No infrastructure to maintain, no embeddings to manage.

Trusted by teams building production RAG applications

5M+
Documents
1,500+
Teams
99.9%
Uptime

Visual Performance Analysis

Performance

ELO Rating Comparison

Win/Loss/Tie Breakdown

Accuracy Across Datasets (nDCG@10)

Latency Distribution (ms)

Breakdown

How the models stack up

MetricQwen3 Embedding 0.6BJina Embeddings v3Description
Overall Performance
ELO Rating
1426
1419
Overall ranking quality based on pairwise comparisons
Win Rate
35.7%
34.6%
Percentage of comparisons won against other models
Pricing & Availability
Price per 1M tokens
$0.010
$0.045
Cost per million tokens processed
Dimensions
1024
1024
Vector embedding dimensions (lower is more efficient)
Release Date
2025-06-06
2024-09-18
Model release date
Accuracy Metrics
Avg nDCG@10
0.656
0.674
Normalized discounted cumulative gain at position 10
Performance Metrics
Avg Latency
25ms
223ms
Average response time across all datasets

Build RAG in Minutes, Not Months

Agentset gives you a complete RAG API with top-ranked embedding models and smart retrieval built in. Upload your data, call the API, and get accurate results from day one.

import { Agentset } from "agentset";

const agentset = new Agentset();
const ns = agentset.namespace("ns_1234");

const results = await ns.search(
  "What is multi-head attention?"
);

for (const result of results) {
  console.log(result.text);
}

Dataset Performance

By field

Comprehensive comparison of accuracy metrics (nDCG, Recall) and latency percentiles for each benchmark dataset.

business reports

MetricQwen3 Embedding 0.6BJina Embeddings v3Description
Accuracy Metrics
nDCG@5
0.000
0.000
Ranking quality at top 5 results
nDCG@10
0.000
0.000
Ranking quality at top 10 results
Recall@5
0.000
0.000
% of relevant docs in top 5
Recall@10
0.000
0.000
% of relevant docs in top 10
Latency Metrics
Mean
21ms
26ms
Average response time
P50
21ms
26ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
21ms
26ms
90th percentile

DBPedia

MetricQwen3 Embedding 0.6BJina Embeddings v3Description
Accuracy Metrics
nDCG@5
0.716
0.835
Ranking quality at top 5 results
nDCG@10
0.730
0.789
Ranking quality at top 10 results
Recall@5
0.053
0.062
% of relevant docs in top 5
Recall@10
0.105
0.121
% of relevant docs in top 10
Latency Metrics
Mean
13ms
107ms
Average response time
P50
13ms
107ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
13ms
107ms
90th percentile

FiQa

MetricQwen3 Embedding 0.6BJina Embeddings v3Description
Accuracy Metrics
nDCG@5
0.755
0.764
Ranking quality at top 5 results
nDCG@10
0.755
0.775
Ranking quality at top 10 results
Recall@5
0.591
0.635
% of relevant docs in top 5
Recall@10
0.683
0.745
% of relevant docs in top 10
Latency Metrics
Mean
19ms
273ms
Average response time
P50
19ms
273ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
19ms
273ms
90th percentile

SciFact

MetricQwen3 Embedding 0.6BJina Embeddings v3Description
Accuracy Metrics
nDCG@5
0.658
0.600
Ranking quality at top 5 results
nDCG@10
0.666
0.636
Ranking quality at top 10 results
Recall@5
0.718
0.709
% of relevant docs in top 5
Recall@10
0.779
0.816
% of relevant docs in top 10
Latency Metrics
Mean
62ms
75ms
Average response time
P50
62ms
75ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
62ms
75ms
90th percentile

MSMARCO

MetricQwen3 Embedding 0.6BJina Embeddings v3Description
Accuracy Metrics
nDCG@5
0.943
0.958
Ranking quality at top 5 results
nDCG@10
0.933
0.944
Ranking quality at top 10 results
Recall@5
0.122
0.124
% of relevant docs in top 5
Recall@10
0.215
0.219
% of relevant docs in top 10
Latency Metrics
Mean
15ms
346ms
Average response time
P50
15ms
346ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
15ms
346ms
90th percentile

ARCD

MetricQwen3 Embedding 0.6BJina Embeddings v3Description
Accuracy Metrics
nDCG@5
0.757
0.797
Ranking quality at top 5 results
nDCG@10
0.763
0.809
Ranking quality at top 10 results
Recall@5
0.880
0.920
% of relevant docs in top 5
Recall@10
0.900
0.960
% of relevant docs in top 10
Latency Metrics
Mean
18ms
513ms
Average response time
P50
18ms
513ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
18ms
513ms
90th percentile

Explore More

Compare more embeddings

See how all embedding models stack up. Compare OpenAI, Cohere, Jina AI, Voyage, and more. View comprehensive benchmarks, compare performance metrics, and find the perfect embedding for your RAG application.