Model comparison

Llama 3-8B vs Qwen3 Coder Next

Qwen3 Coder Next is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.8 to 25.3 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3-8B costs 2.1× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3 Coder Next's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

Llama 3-8B Meta

25.3

Rank #338 Confirmed

Qwen3 Coder Next Alibaba (Qwen)

33.8

Rank #229 Reported

Summary

  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3 Coder Next leads 21.7 to 13.8.
  • Llama 3-8B is cheaper at $0.14 / $0.14 per million input/output tokens, against $0.12 / $0.80 for Qwen3 Coder Next.
  • Qwen3 Coder Next accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 8K.

Side by side

Llama 3-8B and Qwen3 Coder Next specifications
Llama 3-8BQwen3 Coder Next
ProviderMetaAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index25.333.8
Released2024-04-182026-02-02
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window8K262K
Max output8K66K
Input $ / M tokens$0.14$0.12
Output $ / M tokens$0.14$0.80
Results tracked343

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3 Coder Next leads

Llama 3-8B: 30.5 (#285), Qwen3 Coder Next: 35.8 (#206)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3-8BQwen3 Coder Next
SciCode—32.3%
WeirdML—34.4%
BigCodeBench Instruct31.9%—
LMArena Coding1152—
BigCodeBench Complete36.9%—
HumanEval+56.7%—
MBPP+54.8%—

Reasoning Qwen3 Coder Next leads

Llama 3-8B: 13.8 (#321), Qwen3 Coder Next: 21.7 (#191)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3-8BQwen3 Coder Next
CritPt—0%
Chess Puzzles0%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1133—
DTBench43.9%—
Adversarial NLI57.3%—
Epoch Capabilities Index116.33—
ForecastBench58.6—
WinoGrande75.7%—

Math Not comparable

Llama 3-8B: 8.3 (#317), Qwen3 Coder Next: —

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3-8BQwen3 Coder Next
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20251.9%—
LMArena Math1151—
MATH Level 56.1%—

Knowledge Not comparable

Llama 3-8B: 7.8 (#303), Qwen3 Coder Next: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3-8BQwen3 Coder Next
GPQA Diamond26.1%—
LMArena Expert1113—
ARC (AI2) Challenge82.8%—
MMLU68.8%—
OpenBookQA82.6%—
TriviaQA67.7%—

Multilingual Not comparable

Llama 3-8B: 31.0 (#256), Qwen3 Coder Next: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3-8BQwen3 Coder Next
LMArena Non-English1098—
LMArena Chinese1076—
LMArena French1158—
LMArena German1104—
LMArena Japanese967—
LMArena Korean1003—
LMArena Russian1109—
LMArena Spanish1172—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Llama 3-8B: 58.7 (#255), Qwen3 Coder Next: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3-8BQwen3 Coder Next
LMArena Instruction Following1127—

Long Context Not comparable

Llama 3-8B: 34.2 (#246), Qwen3 Coder Next: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3-8BQwen3 Coder Next
LMArena Longer Query1128—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Llama 3-8B: 37.7 (#251), Qwen3 Coder Next: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3-8BQwen3 Coder Next
LMArena Text1166—
LMArena Creative Writing1150—
LMArena Multi-Turn1152—

Frequently asked questions

Is Llama 3-8B better than Qwen3 Coder Next?

Qwen3 Coder Next is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.8 to 25.3 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3-8B costs 2.1× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3 Coder Next's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Llama 3-8B or Qwen3 Coder Next?

Llama 3-8B is cheaper. It lists at $0.14 per million input tokens and $0.14 per million output tokens; Qwen3 Coder Next lists at $0.12 and $0.80.

Is Llama 3-8B or Qwen3 Coder Next better for coding?

Qwen3 Coder Next scores higher on coding benchmarks: 35.8 versus 30.5 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3 Coder Next does, with 262K tokens against 8K.

How many benchmarks do Llama 3-8B and Qwen3 Coder Next share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3-8B has 34 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 Coder Next has 3.

Related comparisons

Go deeper