Model comparison
Llama 3.2 3B vs Qwen3 Max
Qwen3 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.5 to 28.4 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 3B costs 20× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3 Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.
Meta
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3.2 3B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3 Max in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen3 Max leads 62.6 to 24.9.
- Llama 3.2 3B is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.33 per million input/output tokens, against $1.20 / $6 for Qwen3 Max.
- Qwen3 Max accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 131K.
- Llama 3.2 3B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Llama 3.2 3B | Qwen3 Max | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 28.4 | 43.5 |
| Released | 2024-09-24 | 2025-09-23 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 131K | 262K |
| Max output | 118K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.05 | $1.20 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.33 | $6 |
| Results tracked | 18 | 33 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3 Max leads
Llama 3.2 3B: 27.1 (#314), Qwen3 Max: 42.4 (#93)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1098 | 1456 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 23.4% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 28.3% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 370.45 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Llama 3.2 3B: 19.9 (#135), Qwen3 Max: —
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 21.9% | — |
| BALROG | 10.1% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 71.56 |
Reasoning Qwen3 Max leads
Llama 3.2 3B: 20.1 (#225), Qwen3 Max: 22.0 (#186)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1095 | 1448 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 72.5% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 30.1% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 4% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 5% |
| DTBench | — | 82.1% |
| LMCA | — | 28.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 142.41 |
Math Qwen3 Max leads
Llama 3.2 3B: 29.9 (#213), Qwen3 Max: 37.6 (#94)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1126 | 1447 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 18.9% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 73.3% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 97.1% |
Knowledge Qwen3 Max leads
Llama 3.2 3B: 29.1 (#232), Qwen3 Max: 48.1 (#72)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1090 | 1457 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 72.6% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 48.7% |
Multilingual Qwen3 Max leads
Llama 3.2 3B: 26.4 (#276), Qwen3 Max: 53.9 (#58)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1019 | 1429 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1017 | 1479 |
| LMArena German | 1056 | 1463 |
| LMArena Russian | 949 | 1428 |
| LMArena French | — | 1450 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1399 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1397 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1463 |
Instruction Following Qwen3 Max leads
Llama 3.2 3B: 56.3 (#270), Qwen3 Max: 75.0 (#81)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1089 | 1420 |
Long Context Qwen3 Max leads
Llama 3.2 3B: 33.4 (#256), Qwen3 Max: 41.6 (#129)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1101 | 1439 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 66.7% |
| CL-bench | — | 14.5% |
Writing & Preference Qwen3 Max leads
Llama 3.2 3B: 24.9 (#302), Qwen3 Max: 62.6 (#72)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1110 | 1439 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1094 | 1401 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1105 | 1446 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 595 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Llama 3.2 3B better than Qwen3 Max?
Qwen3 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.5 to 28.4 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 3B costs 20× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3 Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Llama 3.2 3B or Qwen3 Max?
Llama 3.2 3B is cheaper. It lists at $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.33 per million output tokens; Qwen3 Max lists at $1.20 and $6.
Is Llama 3.2 3B or Qwen3 Max better for coding?
Qwen3 Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.4 versus 27.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3 Max does, with 262K tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do Llama 3.2 3B and Qwen3 Max share?
13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.2 3B has 18 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 Max has 33.