# Llama 3.1-70B vs Qwen Plus

> Qwen Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 36.7 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.1-70B costs 1.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen Plus's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/llama-3-1-70b-vs-qwen-plus
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 18

## Summary

- They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3.1-70B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen Plus in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen Plus leads 52.4 to 35.6.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is MATH Level 5: 36.7% for Llama 3.1-70B and 65.3% for Qwen Plus.
- Llama 3.1-70B is cheaper at $0.40 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $0.40 / $1.20 for Qwen Plus.
- Qwen Plus accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.
- Llama 3.1-70B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Llama 3.1-70B | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 29.4 | 36.7 |
| Rank | 299 | 204 |
| Context | 128K | 1M |
| Input $/M | $0.40 | $0.40 |
| Output $/M | $0.40 | $1.20 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Llama 3.1-70B: 29.8 (#292)
- Qwen Plus: 38.3 (#163)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-70B | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1260 | 1328 |
| WeirdML | 9% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 46.1% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 54.8% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Llama 3.1-70B: 24.9 (#104)
- Qwen Plus: —

| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-70B | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| TheAgentCompany | 6.9% | — |
| BALROG | 27.9% | — |

## Reasoning

- Llama 3.1-70B: 20.8 (#215)
- Qwen Plus: 27.6 (#101)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-70B | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1241 | 1317 |
| DTBench | 60% | 81.1% |
| LMCA | 14.8% | 24% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 63.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 125.91 | — |

## Math

- Llama 3.1-70B: 12.7 (#298)
- Qwen Plus: 22.0 (#266)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-70B | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 3.6% | 17.8% |
| LMArena Math | 1252 | 1326 |
| MATH Level 5 | 36.7% | 65.3% |
| Omni-MATH | 21% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 1.7% |

## Knowledge

- Llama 3.1-70B: 24.1 (#264)
- Qwen Plus: 27.4 (#245)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-70B | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 44.2% | 48.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1209 | 1328 |
| MMLU-Pro | 65.3% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 42.6% | — |
| MMLU | 80.1% | — |

## Multilingual

- Llama 3.1-70B: 38.9 (#220)
- Qwen Plus: 45.3 (#170)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-70B | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1219 | 1310 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1215 | 1347 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1132 | 1251 |
| LMArena Russian | 1234 | 1323 |
| LMArena French | 1260 | — |
| LMArena German | 1222 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1140 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1253 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Llama 3.1-70B: 65.5 (#218)
- Qwen Plus: 69.0 (#176)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-70B | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1231 | 1303 |
| IFEval | 82.1% | — |

## Long Context

- Llama 3.1-70B: 37.6 (#208)
- Qwen Plus: 40.3 (#153)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-70B | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1241 | 1325 |

## Writing & Preference

- Llama 3.1-70B: 35.6 (#262)
- Qwen Plus: 52.4 (#171)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-70B | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1261 | 1326 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1232 | 1293 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1256 | 1336 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 784 | — |
| WildBench | 75.8% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Llama 3.1-70B better than Qwen Plus?

Qwen Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 36.7 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.1-70B costs 1.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen Plus's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Llama 3.1-70B or Qwen Plus?

Llama 3.1-70B is cheaper. It lists at $0.40 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Qwen Plus lists at $0.40 and $1.20.

### Is Llama 3.1-70B or Qwen Plus better for coding?

Qwen Plus scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.3 versus 29.8 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen Plus does, with 1M tokens against 128K.

### How many benchmarks do Llama 3.1-70B and Qwen Plus share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.1-70B has 35 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Plus has 20.