Model comparison

Llama 3.1-8B vs Qwen3-1.7B

Qwen3-1.7B is the stronger model overall, scoring 26.6 to 23.0 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 4 shared benchmarks.

Llama 3.1-8B Meta

23.0

Rank #352 Confirmed

Qwen3-1.7B Alibaba (Qwen)

26.6

Rank #336 Reported

Summary

  • They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3.1-8B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3-1.7B in 4 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3-1.7B leads 19.6 to 8.0.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 27% for Llama 3.1-8B and 38% for Qwen3-1.7B.

Side by side

Llama 3.1-8B and Qwen3-1.7B specifications
Llama 3.1-8BQwen3-1.7B
ProviderMetaAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index23.026.6
Released2024-07-232025-04-29
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window128K—
Max output4K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.05—
Output $ / M tokens$0.08—
Results tracked434

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Llama 3.1-8B: 20.2 (#340), Qwen3-1.7B: —

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-8BQwen3-1.7B
SciCode13.2%—
WeirdML1.7%—
BigCodeBench Instruct32.8%—
LMArena Coding1195—
BigCodeBench Complete40.5%—
HumanEval+62.8%—
MBPP+55.6%—

Agentic & Tool Use Qwen3-1.7B leads

Llama 3.1-8B: 22.5 (#131), Qwen3-1.7B: 24.7 (#115)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-8BQwen3-1.7B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard25.8%28.4%
BALROG15.1%—

Reasoning Qwen3-1.7B leads

Llama 3.1-8B: 14.9 (#321), Qwen3-1.7B: 19.2 (#267)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-8BQwen3-1.7B
Chess Puzzles0%0%
CritPt0%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1175—
DTBench50.9%—
LMCA5.4%—
Epoch Capabilities Index116.57—
PIQA81.2%—

Math Qwen3-1.7B leads

Llama 3.1-8B: 10.2 (#317), Qwen3-1.7B: 16.3 (#294)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-8BQwen3-1.7B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20251.7%8.1%
Omni-MATH13.7%—
LMArena Math1179—
MATH Level 522.9%—
GSM8K82.4%—

Knowledge Qwen3-1.7B leads

Llama 3.1-8B: 8.0 (#307), Qwen3-1.7B: 19.6 (#278)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-8BQwen3-1.7B
GPQA Diamond27%38%
MMLU-Pro40.6%—
GPQA (HELM)24.7%—
LMArena Expert1144—
BoolQ82.8%—
MMLU56.1%—

Multilingual Not comparable

Llama 3.1-8B: 34.0 (#249), Qwen3-1.7B: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-8BQwen3-1.7B
LMArena Non-English1148—
LMArena Chinese1151—
LMArena French1177—
LMArena German1144—
LMArena Japanese1061—
LMArena Korean1053—
LMArena Russian1158—
LMArena Spanish1169—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Llama 3.1-8B: 58.9 (#258), Qwen3-1.7B: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-8BQwen3-1.7B
IFEval74.3%—
LMArena Instruction Following1159—

Long Context Not comparable

Llama 3.1-8B: 35.8 (#238), Qwen3-1.7B: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-8BQwen3-1.7B
LMArena Longer Query1182—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Llama 3.1-8B: 29.7 (#290), Qwen3-1.7B: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-8BQwen3-1.7B
LMArena Text1187—
LMArena Creative Writing1154—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing713—
WildBench68.7%—
LMArena Multi-Turn1172—

Frequently asked questions

Is Llama 3.1-8B better than Qwen3-1.7B?

Qwen3-1.7B is the stronger model overall, scoring 26.6 to 23.0 on the Noometry Index.

How many benchmarks do Llama 3.1-8B and Qwen3-1.7B share?

4 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.1-8B has 43 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3-1.7B has 4.

Related comparisons

Go deeper