Noometry

Model comparison

Llama 3.1-8B vs Qwen3.7 Flash

Qwen3.7 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.9 to 23.0 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 4 shared benchmarks.

Llama 3.1-8B Meta

23.0

Rank #352 Confirmed

Qwen3.7 Flash Alibaba (Qwen)

39.9

Rank #156 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3.1-8B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.7 Flash in 3 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.7 Flash leads 48.9 to 8.0.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 1.7% for Llama 3.1-8B and 86.7% for Qwen3.7 Flash.
  • Both cost about the same: $0.05 input and $0.08 output per million tokens.
  • Qwen3.7 Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.
  • Llama 3.1-8B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Llama 3.1-8BQwen3.7 Flash
ProviderMetaAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index23.039.9
Released2024-07-232026-07-15
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window128K1M
Max output4K131K
Input $ / M tokens$0.05$0.03
Output $ / M tokens$0.08$0.13
Results tracked437

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), Qwen3.7 Flash: —

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

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Llama 3.1-8B: 22.5 (#131), Qwen3.7 Flash: —

BenchmarkLlama 3.1-8BQwen3.7 Flash
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard25.8%—
BALROG15.1%—

Reasoning Qwen3.7 Flash leads

Llama 3.1-8B: 14.9 (#321), Qwen3.7 Flash: 28.2 (#108)

BenchmarkLlama 3.1-8BQwen3.7 Flash
Chess Puzzles0%23%
Epoch Capabilities Index116.57144.64
NYT Connections (extended)—43.8%
CritPt0%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1175—
Mystery Game Puzzles—15%
DTBench50.9%—
LMCA5.4%—
PIQA81.2%—

Math Qwen3.7 Flash leads

Llama 3.1-8B: 10.2 (#317), Qwen3.7 Flash: 38.3 (#140)

BenchmarkLlama 3.1-8BQwen3.7 Flash
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20251.7%86.7%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—19.3%
Omni-MATH13.7%—
LMArena Math1179—
MATH Level 522.9%—
GSM8K82.4%—

Knowledge Qwen3.7 Flash leads

Llama 3.1-8B: 8.0 (#307), Qwen3.7 Flash: 48.9 (#75)

BenchmarkLlama 3.1-8BQwen3.7 Flash
GPQA Diamond27%82.3%
MMLU-Pro40.6%—
GPQA (HELM)24.7%—
LMArena Expert1144—
BoolQ82.8%—
MMLU56.1%—

Multilingual Not comparable

Llama 3.1-8B: 34.0 (#249), Qwen3.7 Flash: —

BenchmarkLlama 3.1-8BQwen3.7 Flash
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), Qwen3.7 Flash: —

BenchmarkLlama 3.1-8BQwen3.7 Flash
IFEval74.3%—
LMArena Instruction Following1159—

Long Context Not comparable

Llama 3.1-8B: 35.8 (#238), Qwen3.7 Flash: —

BenchmarkLlama 3.1-8BQwen3.7 Flash
LMArena Longer Query1182—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Llama 3.1-8B: 29.7 (#290), Qwen3.7 Flash: —

BenchmarkLlama 3.1-8BQwen3.7 Flash
LMArena Text1187—
LMArena Creative Writing1154—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing713—
WildBench68.7%—
LMArena Multi-Turn1172—

Frequently asked questions

Is Llama 3.1-8B better than Qwen3.7 Flash?

Qwen3.7 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.9 to 23.0 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Llama 3.1-8B or Qwen3.7 Flash?

Qwen3.7 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.03 per million input tokens and $0.13 per million output tokens; Llama 3.1-8B lists at $0.05 and $0.08.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.7 Flash does, with 1M tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do Llama 3.1-8B and Qwen3.7 Flash share?

4 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.1-8B has 43 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Flash has 7.

Related comparisons

Go deeper