# Llama 3.1-70B vs Qwen3.7 Plus

> Qwen3.7 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.3 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.1-70B costs 1.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.7 Plus's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/llama-3-1-70b-vs-qwen3-7-plus
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 22

## Summary

- They share 22 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3.1-70B scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.7 Plus in 8 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.7 Plus leads 50.5 to 13.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 3.6% for Llama 3.1-70B and 93.3% for Qwen3.7 Plus.
- Llama 3.1-70B is cheaper at $0.40 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $0.40 / $1.60 for Qwen3.7 Plus.
- Qwen3.7 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 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 29.6 | 45.3 |
| Rank | 308 | 72 |
| Context | 128K | 1M |
| Input $/M | $0.40 | $0.40 |
| Output $/M | $0.40 | $1.60 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Llama 3.1-70B: 30.3 (#296)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 36.6 (#206)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-70B | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1260 | 1473 |
| FrontierCode | — | 10.2% |
| SciCode | — | 45.5% |
| WeirdML | 9% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 46.1% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 54.8% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Llama 3.1-70B: 25.1 (#112)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 21.4 (#138)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-70B | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| OSWorld 2.0 | — | 2.8% |
| TheAgentCompany | 6.9% | — |
| BALROG | 27.9% | — |

## Reasoning

- Llama 3.1-70B: 21.6 (#220)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 39.3 (#59)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-70B | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1241 | 1460 |
| DTBench | 60% | 84% |
| LMCA | 14.8% | 37.6% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 125.92 | 147.37 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 74.8% |
| CritPt | — | 9.1% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 24% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 17% |

## Math

- Llama 3.1-70B: 13.5 (#304)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 50.5 (#56)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-70B | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 3.6% | 93.3% |
| LMArena Math | 1252 | 1466 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 34.4% |
| Omni-MATH | 21% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 36.7% | — |

## Knowledge

- Llama 3.1-70B: 24.2 (#269)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 54.9 (#51)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-70B | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 44.2% | 87.9% |
| LMArena Expert | 1209 | 1467 |
| MMLU-Pro | 65.3% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 42.6% | — |
| MMLU | 80.1% | — |

## Multimodal

- Llama 3.1-70B: —
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 41.8 (#33)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-70B | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1279 |
| LMArena Document | — | 1444 |

## Multilingual

- Llama 3.1-70B: 38.8 (#225)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 54.8 (#38)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-70B | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1219 | 1445 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1215 | 1510 |
| LMArena French | 1261 | 1473 |
| LMArena German | 1222 | 1471 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1132 | 1413 |
| LMArena Korean | 1140 | 1415 |
| LMArena Russian | 1234 | 1457 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1253 | 1457 |

## Instruction Following

- Llama 3.1-70B: 65.3 (#223)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 75.8 (#52)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-70B | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1231 | 1440 |
| IFEval | 82.1% | — |

## Long Context

- Llama 3.1-70B: 37.6 (#214)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 44.5 (#65)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-70B | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1241 | 1455 |

## Writing & Preference

- Llama 3.1-70B: 35.4 (#267)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 64.3 (#56)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-70B | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1261 | 1455 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1232 | 1439 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1256 | 1460 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 784 | — |
| WildBench | 75.8% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Llama 3.1-70B better than Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.3 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.1-70B costs 1.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.7 Plus's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Llama 3.1-70B or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Llama 3.1-70B is cheaper. It lists at $0.40 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Qwen3.7 Plus lists at $0.40 and $1.60.

### Is Llama 3.1-70B or Qwen3.7 Plus better for coding?

Qwen3.7 Plus scores higher on coding benchmarks: 36.6 versus 30.3 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.7 Plus does, with 1M tokens against 128K.

### How many benchmarks do Llama 3.1-70B and Qwen3.7 Plus share?

22 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.1-70B has 35 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Plus has 32.