Model comparison
Llama 4 Scout vs Qwen3 8B
Qwen3 8B is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.7 to 27.7 on the Noometry Index. Llama 4 Scout costs 2.1× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3 8B's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 10 shared benchmarks.
Meta
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 4 Scout scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3 8B in 6 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3 8B leads 34.9 to 19.6.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 7.8% for Llama 4 Scout and 56.1% for Qwen3 8B.
- Llama 4 Scout is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.30 per million input/output tokens, against $0.18 / $0.70 for Qwen3 8B.
- Qwen3 8B accepts more context: 131K tokens versus 128K.
Side by side
| Llama 4 Scout | Qwen3 8B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 27.7 | 33.7 |
| Released | 2025-04-05 | 2025-04 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 128K | 131K |
| Max output | 4K | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.10 | $0.18 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.30 | $0.70 |
| Results tracked | 43 | 11 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3 8B leads
Llama 4 Scout: 20.2 (#339), Qwen3 8B: 34.0 (#248)
| Benchmark | Llama 4 Scout | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 17% | 22.6% |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 9.1% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1286 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 43.1% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Qwen3 8B leads
Llama 4 Scout: 24.6 (#119), Qwen3 8B: 30.2 (#78)
| Benchmark | Llama 4 Scout | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 28.1% | 42.6% |
Reasoning Qwen3 8B leads
Llama 4 Scout: 9.1 (#345), Qwen3 8B: 16.6 (#303)
| Benchmark | Llama 4 Scout | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 0% | 0% |
| DTBench | 57.9% | 59.7% |
| LMCA | 12% | 8.8% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 129.64 | 136.17 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 0% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 36.9% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 0.5% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 5% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1266 | — |
| ForecastBench | 57.5 | — |
Math Qwen3 8B leads
Llama 4 Scout: 19.6 (#286), Qwen3 8B: 34.9 (#191)
| Benchmark | Llama 4 Scout | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 7.8% | 56.1% |
| Omni-MATH | 37.3% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1287 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 62.3% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 0% | — |
Knowledge Qwen3 8B leads
Llama 4 Scout: 31.9 (#217), Qwen3 8B: 36.1 (#173)
| Benchmark | Llama 4 Scout | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 51.8% | 56.8% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 7.7% | 4.8% |
| MMLU-Pro | 74.2% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 50.7% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1235 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Llama 4 Scout: 32.2 (#102), Qwen3 8B: —
| Benchmark | Llama 4 Scout | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1118 | — |
| SpatialViz-Bench | 34.2% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Llama 4 Scout: 41.0 (#212), Qwen3 8B: —
| Benchmark | Llama 4 Scout | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1252 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1255 | — |
| LMArena French | 1282 | — |
| LMArena German | 1272 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1206 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1207 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1263 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1278 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Llama 4 Scout: 65.8 (#217), Qwen3 8B: —
| Benchmark | Llama 4 Scout | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | 81.8% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1248 | — |
Long Context Qwen3 8B leads
Llama 4 Scout: 27.5 (#294), Qwen3 8B: 37.9 (#210)
| Benchmark | Llama 4 Scout | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 36% | 62.1% |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1265 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Llama 4 Scout: 37.0 (#261), Qwen3 8B: —
| Benchmark | Llama 4 Scout | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1279 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1249 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 783 | — |
| WildBench | 78% | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1280 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Llama 4 Scout better than Qwen3 8B?
Qwen3 8B is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.7 to 27.7 on the Noometry Index. Llama 4 Scout costs 2.1× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3 8B's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Llama 4 Scout or Qwen3 8B?
Llama 4 Scout is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.30 per million output tokens; Qwen3 8B lists at $0.18 and $0.70.
Is Llama 4 Scout or Qwen3 8B better for coding?
Qwen3 8B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.0 versus 20.2 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3 8B does, with 131K tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do Llama 4 Scout and Qwen3 8B share?
10 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 4 Scout has 43 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 8B has 11.