Model comparison

Llama 3.2 3B vs Qwen Plus

Qwen Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.1 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 3B costs 5.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen Plus's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified October 11, 2026. 12 shared benchmarks.

Llama 3.2 3B

Summary

They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3.2 3B scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen Plus in 6 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen Plus leads 52.2 to 24.7.
Llama 3.2 3B is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.33 per million input/output tokens, against $0.40 / $1.20 for Qwen Plus.
Qwen Plus accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 131K.
Llama 3.2 3B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Llama 3.2 3B and Qwen Plus specifications
	Llama 3.2 3B	Qwen Plus
Provider	Meta	Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index	28.9	37.1
Released	2024-09-24	2024-01-25
Weights	Open	Proprietary
Context window	131K	1M
Max output	118K	33K
Input $ / M tokens	$0.05	$0.40
Output $ / M tokens	$0.33	$1.20
Results tracked	18	20

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen Plus leads

Llama 3.2 3B: 27.6 (#319), Qwen Plus: 38.9 (#167)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 3B	Qwen Plus
LMArena Coding	1098	1328
BigCodeBench Instruct	23.4%	—
BigCodeBench Complete	28.3%	—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Llama 3.2 3B: 20.1 (#143), Qwen Plus: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 3B	Qwen Plus
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard	21.9%	—
BALROG	10.1%	—

Reasoning Qwen Plus leads

Llama 3.2 3B: 21.0 (#228), Qwen Plus: 28.4 (#107)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 3B	Qwen Plus
LMArena Hard Prompts	1095	1317
Kagi LLM Benchmark	—	63.3%
DTBench	—	81.1%
LMCA	—	24%

Math Llama 3.2 3B leads

Llama 3.2 3B: 32.4 (#214), Qwen Plus: 23.3 (#271)

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 3B	Qwen Plus
LMArena Math	1126	1326
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025	—	17.8%
MATH Level 5	—	65.3%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)	—	1.7%

Knowledge Llama 3.2 3B leads

Llama 3.2 3B: 29.7 (#235), Qwen Plus: 27.4 (#251)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 3B	Qwen Plus
LMArena Expert	1090	1328
GPQA Diamond	—	48.1%

Multilingual Qwen Plus leads

Llama 3.2 3B: 26.2 (#281), Qwen Plus: 45.1 (#175)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 3B	Qwen Plus
LMArena Non-English	1019	1310
LMArena Chinese	1017	1347
LMArena Russian	949	1323
LMArena German	1056	—
LMArena Japanese	—	1251

Instruction Following Qwen Plus leads

Llama 3.2 3B: 56.0 (#275), Qwen Plus: 68.8 (#181)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 3B	Qwen Plus
LMArena Instruction Following	1089	1303

Long Context Qwen Plus leads

Llama 3.2 3B: 33.4 (#261), Qwen Plus: 40.3 (#158)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 3B	Qwen Plus
LMArena Longer Query	1100	1324

Writing & Preference Qwen Plus leads

Llama 3.2 3B: 24.7 (#307), Qwen Plus: 52.2 (#176)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 3B	Qwen Plus
LMArena Text	1110	1326
LMArena Creative Writing	1094	1293
LMArena Multi-Turn	1105	1336
EQ-Bench Creative Writing	595	—

Frequently asked questions

Is Llama 3.2 3B better than Qwen Plus?

Which is cheaper, Llama 3.2 3B or Qwen Plus?

Llama 3.2 3B is cheaper. It lists at $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.33 per million output tokens; Qwen Plus lists at $0.40 and $1.20.

Is Llama 3.2 3B or Qwen Plus better for coding?

Qwen Plus scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.9 versus 27.6 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen Plus does, with 1M tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do Llama 3.2 3B and Qwen Plus share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.2 3B has 18 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Plus has 20.