Skip to content

Llama 3.1 70B Instruct vs Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct

Signal-by-Signal Comparison
SignalLlama 3.1 70B InstructDeltaQwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct
Capabilities
50
--
50
Benchmarks
75
+8
67
Pricing
100
+1
99
Context window size
73
-4
77
Recency
1
-76
77
Output Capacity
70
-20
90
Overall Result
2 wins
of 6
3 wins
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct wins 3 of 6 signals

Score History

Score History (22 data points)
Llama 3.1 70B InstructQwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct

66.9

current score

Leader

Llama 3.1 70B Instruct

right now

Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct

66.5

current score

LMMarketCap.com
Interactive Price Comparison
100Kcalls/month
1,000tokens (~1,333 chars)
500tokens (~667 chars)

Llama 3.1 70B Instruct

Meta

Best Value
Per request$0.000600
Daily$2.00
Monthly$60.00
Annual$720.00

Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct

Alibaba

Per request$0.000650
Daily$2.17
Monthly$65.00
Annual$780.00

Llama 3.1 70B Instruct saves you $5.00/month

That's $60.00/year compared to Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.

8% cheaper
Choose Llama 3.1 70B Instruct for cost optimization

Llama 3.1 70B Instruct pricing:
Input:$0.40/M tokens
Output:$0.40/M tokens
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct pricing:
Input:$0.10/M tokens
Output:$1.10/M tokens
Winner
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct

Meta

67

Composite Score

Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct

Alibaba

67

Composite Score

Signal-by-Signal Comparison
MetricLlama 3.1 70B InstructQwen3 Next 80B A3B InstructWinner
Overall Score
67
67
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
Rank#120#122
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
Quality Rank#120#122
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
Adoption Rank#120#122
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
Parameters70B80B--
Context Window131K262K
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct
Pricing$0.40/$0.40/M$0.10/$1.10/M--
Signal Scores
Capabilities
50
50
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
Benchmarks
75
67
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
Pricing
100
99
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
Context window size
73
77
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct
Recency
1
77
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct
Output Capacity
70
90
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct
Benchmark Head-to-Head(11 benchmarks)
Llama 3.1: 0Qwen3 Next: 1
Llama 3.1
Qwen3 Next
Normalized 0-100%
MMLU
86%-
GPQA Diamond
46.7%-
MATH-500
68%-
HumanEval
80.5%-
GSM8K
95.1%-
IFEval
83.6%-
BBH
81.2%-
ARC-Challenge
94.8%-
HellaSwag
94.8%-
Arena Elo
11981401
BigCodeBench
46.1%-
Benchmark Interpretation

Our score (0-100) is driven by benchmark performance (90%) from Arena Elo ratings, MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations. Capabilities and context window serve as tiebreakers (10%). Learn more about our methodology.

Llama 3.1 70B InstructCompetitive

Scores 67/100 (rank #120), placing it in the top 59% of all 290 models tracked.

Raw Quality0/100
Cost Efficiency0/100
Speed0/100
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B InstructCompetitive

Scores 67/100 (rank #122), placing it in the top 58% of all 290 models tracked.

Raw Quality0/100
Cost Efficiency0/100
Speed0/100

With only a 0-point gap, these models are in the same performance tier. The practical difference in output quality is minimal - your choice should depend on pricing, latency requirements, and specific feature needs.

When to Use Each Model

Choose Llama 3.1 70B Instruct when you need:

  • High-volume production workloads where API costs must be minimized
  • Self-hosted deployments where you need full control over the model

Choose Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct when you need:

  • Processing long documents or large codebases (262K token context)
  • Self-hosted deployments where you need full control over the model
Cost-Performance Analysis
Llama 3.1 70B InstructBest Value
Input cost$0.40/M tokens
Output cost$0.40/M tokens
Cost per quality point$0.012
Est. monthly (1M tokens/day)$12.00
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct
Input cost$0.10/M tokens
Output cost$1.10/M tokens
Cost per quality point$0.018
Est. monthly (1M tokens/day)$18.00

Llama 3.1 70B Instruct offers 33% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $12.00/month with Llama 3.1 70B Instruct vs $18.00/month with Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct - a $6.00 monthly difference.

Latency & Speed
Llama 3.1 70B InstructFaster
Speed score0/100
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct
Speed score0/100

Both models have comparable response speeds. For most applications, the latency difference is negligible.

When latency matters most: Interactive chatbots, IDE code completion, real-time translation, and user-facing applications where response time directly impacts experience. For batch processing, background summarization, or offline analysis, latency is less critical.

Example Use Cases

Code generation & review

Based on overall model capabilities and architecture for coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring

Llama 3.1 70B Instruct

Customer support chatbot

Suitable for user-facing chat with competitive response times. Llama 3.1 70B Instruct also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support

Llama 3.1 70B Instruct

Long document analysis

Larger context window (262K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass

Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct

Batch data extraction

Lower output pricing ($0.40/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily

Llama 3.1 70B Instruct

Creative writing & content

Higher overall composite score (67/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content

Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
Which Should You Choose?
Our recommendation:
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct

Llama 3.1 70B Instruct and Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct are extremely close in overall performance (only 0.4000000000000057 points apart). Your best choice depends entirely on which specific strengths matter most for your use case.

by Meta

  • Choose for Quality - Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
  • Choose for Cost - 33% lower pricing; better value at scale
  • Choose for Reliability - Higher uptime and faster response speeds
  • Choose for Prototyping - Stronger community support and better developer experience
  • Choose for Production - Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale

by Alibaba

Consider for specialized use cases.

Capability Comparison
CapabilityLlama 3.1 70B InstructQwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct
Vision (Image Input)
Function Calling
Streaming
JSON Mode
Reasoning
Web Search
Image Output
Monthly Cost Calculator
1,000tokens (600 in / 400 out)
100requests/day (3,000/month)

Llama 3.1 70B Instruct

Meta

Best Value
$1.20
estimated monthly cost

Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct

Alibaba

$1.50
estimated monthly cost

Llama 3.1 70B Instruct saves you $0.3000/month

That's 20% cheaper than Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct at 1,000 tokens/request and 100 requests/day.

Assumes 60% input / 40% output token ratio per request. Actual costs may vary based on your usage pattern.

Parameters & Context
ParameterLlama 3.1 70B InstructQwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct
Context Window131K262K
Max Output Tokens16,384262,144
Open SourceYesYes
CreatedJul 23, 2024Sep 11, 2025
Last updated: 22m ago

Related comparisons

Llama 3.1 70B Instruct vs Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct (2026) | LM Market Cap