# Llama 4 Scout vs Qwen Plus

> Qwen Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 36.7 to 27.4 on the Noometry Index. Llama 4 Scout costs 4.0× 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-4-scout-vs-qwen-plus
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 20

## Summary

- They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 4 Scout scores higher in 1 category and Qwen Plus in 7 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen Plus leads 27.6 to 9.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Kagi LLM Benchmark: 36.9% for Llama 4 Scout and 63.3% for Qwen Plus.
- Llama 4 Scout is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.30 per million input/output tokens, against $0.40 / $1.20 for Qwen Plus.
- Qwen Plus accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.
- Llama 4 Scout has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Llama 4 Scout | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 27.4 | 36.7 |
| Rank | 323 | 204 |
| Context | 128K | 1M |
| Input $/M | $0.10 | $0.40 |
| Output $/M | $0.30 | $1.20 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Llama 4 Scout: 19.9 (#334)
- Qwen Plus: 38.3 (#163)

| Benchmark | Llama 4 Scout | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1286 | 1328 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 9.1% | — |
| SciCode | 17% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 43.1% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Llama 4 Scout: 24.4 (#109)
- Qwen Plus: —

| Benchmark | Llama 4 Scout | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 28.1% | — |

## Reasoning

- Llama 4 Scout: 9.2 (#339)
- Qwen Plus: 27.6 (#101)

| Benchmark | Llama 4 Scout | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 36.9% | 63.3% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1266 | 1317 |
| DTBench | 57.9% | 81.1% |
| LMCA | 12% | 24% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 0% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 0.5% | — |
| CritPt | 0% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 129.64 | — |
| ForecastBench | 57.5 | — |

## Math

- Llama 4 Scout: 18.4 (#280)
- Qwen Plus: 22.0 (#266)

| Benchmark | Llama 4 Scout | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 7.8% | 17.8% |
| LMArena Math | 1286 | 1326 |
| MATH Level 5 | 62.3% | 65.3% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 0% | 1.7% |
| Omni-MATH | 37.3% | — |

## Knowledge

- Llama 4 Scout: 31.8 (#208)
- Qwen Plus: 27.4 (#245)

| Benchmark | Llama 4 Scout | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 51.8% | 48.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1236 | 1328 |
| MMLU-Pro | 74.2% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 7.7% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 50.7% | — |

## Multimodal

- Llama 4 Scout: 31.6 (#98)
- Qwen Plus: —

| Benchmark | Llama 4 Scout | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1118 | — |
| SpatialViz-Bench | 34.2% | — |

## Multilingual

- Llama 4 Scout: 41.3 (#207)
- Qwen Plus: 45.3 (#170)

| Benchmark | Llama 4 Scout | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1253 | 1310 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1256 | 1347 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1209 | 1251 |
| LMArena Russian | 1263 | 1323 |
| LMArena French | 1283 | — |
| LMArena German | 1274 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1207 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1277 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Llama 4 Scout: 66.0 (#212)
- Qwen Plus: 69.0 (#176)

| Benchmark | Llama 4 Scout | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1248 | 1303 |
| IFEval | 81.8% | — |

## Long Context

- Llama 4 Scout: 27.5 (#289)
- Qwen Plus: 40.3 (#153)

| Benchmark | Llama 4 Scout | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1265 | 1325 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 36% | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Llama 4 Scout: 37.1 (#256)
- Qwen Plus: 52.4 (#171)

| Benchmark | Llama 4 Scout | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1279 | 1326 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1249 | 1293 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1281 | 1336 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 783 | — |
| WildBench | 78% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Llama 4 Scout better than Qwen Plus?

Qwen Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 36.7 to 27.4 on the Noometry Index. Llama 4 Scout costs 4.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen Plus's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Llama 4 Scout or Qwen Plus?

Llama 4 Scout is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.30 per million output tokens; Qwen Plus lists at $0.40 and $1.20.

### Is Llama 4 Scout or Qwen Plus better for coding?

Qwen Plus scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.3 versus 19.9 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

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

### How many benchmarks do Llama 4 Scout and Qwen Plus share?

20 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 4 Scout has 43 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Plus has 20.