# Llama 3.2 1B vs Qwen3.6 Flash

> Qwen3.6 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 20.1 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 1B costs 6.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.6 Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/llama-3-2-1b-vs-qwen3-6-flash
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 4

## Summary

- They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3.2 1B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.6 Flash in 3 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.6 Flash leads 42.1 to 7.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 0.6% for Llama 3.2 1B and 84.4% for Qwen3.6 Flash.
- Llama 3.2 1B is cheaper at $0.027 / $0.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.19 / $1.13 for Qwen3.6 Flash.
- Qwen3.6 Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 60K.
- Llama 3.2 1B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Llama 3.2 1B | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 20.1 | 38.8 |
| Rank | 354 | 182 |
| Context | 60K | 1M |
| Input $/M | $0.027 | $0.19 |
| Output $/M | $0.20 | $1.13 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Llama 3.2 1B: 21.1 (#338)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 8.2% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1070 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 11.3% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 326.4 |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Llama 3.2 1B: 14.6 (#150)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 10.8% | — |
| BALROG | 6.6% | — |

## Reasoning

- Llama 3.2 1B: 16.2 (#308)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: 29.0 (#96)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | 20% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 101.99 | 143.26 |
| SimpleBench | — | 35.2% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1044 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 18% |
| DTBench | — | 77.1% |
| LMCA | — | 31% |

## Math

- Llama 3.2 1B: 10.4 (#313)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: 39.0 (#117)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 0.6% | 84.4% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 22.5% |
| LMArena Math | 1086 | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 10.3% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 0% |

## Knowledge

- Llama 3.2 1B: 7.2 (#312)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: 42.1 (#100)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 23.9% | 83.3% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 15.9% |
| LMArena Expert | 1007 | — |

## Multilingual

- Llama 3.2 1B: 23.8 (#292)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 973 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 959 | — |
| LMArena German | 1014 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 941 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Llama 3.2 1B: 52.4 (#290)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1031 | — |

## Long Context

- Llama 3.2 1B: 31.9 (#274)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1050 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Llama 3.2 1B: 21.3 (#310)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1055 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1033 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 200 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1030 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Llama 3.2 1B better than Qwen3.6 Flash?

Qwen3.6 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 20.1 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 1B costs 6.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.6 Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Llama 3.2 1B or Qwen3.6 Flash?

Llama 3.2 1B is cheaper. It lists at $0.027 per million input tokens and $0.20 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 Flash lists at $0.19 and $1.13.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.6 Flash does, with 1M tokens against 60K.

### How many benchmarks do Llama 3.2 1B and Qwen3.6 Flash share?

4 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.2 1B has 22 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Flash has 13.