Skip to content

Llama 4 Maverick vs Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking

Signal-by-Signal Comparison
SignalLlama 4 MaverickDeltaQwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking
Capabilities
67
-17
83
Benchmarks
76
+10
66
Pricing
99
+3
96
Context window size
96
+14
81
Recency
35
-31
67
Output Capacity
67
-5
72
Overall Result
3 wins
of 6
3 wins
It's a tie - both models win 3 signals each

Score History

Score History (32 data points)
Llama 4 MaverickQwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking
Llama 4 Maverick

70.7

current score

Leader

Llama 4 Maverick

right now

Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking

69.3

current score

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

Llama 4 Maverick

Meta

Best Value
Per request$0.000514
Daily$1.71
Monthly$51.38
Annual$616.50

Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking

Alibaba

Per request$0.002400
Daily$8.00
Monthly$240.00
Annual$2880.00

Llama 4 Maverick saves you $188.63/month

That's $2263.50/year compared to Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.

79% cheaper
Choose Llama 4 Maverick for cost optimization

Llama 4 Maverick pricing:
Input:$0.19/M tokens
Output:$0.65/M tokens
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking pricing:
Input:$0.40/M tokens
Output:$4.00/M tokens
Winner
Llama 4 Maverick

Meta

71

Composite Score

Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking

Alibaba

69

Composite Score

Signal-by-Signal Comparison
MetricLlama 4 MaverickQwen3 VL 235B A22B ThinkingWinner
Overall Score
71
69
Llama 4 Maverick
Rank#165#169
Llama 4 Maverick
Quality Rank#165#169
Llama 4 Maverick
Adoption Rank#165#169
Llama 4 Maverick
Parameters--235B--
Context Window1049K131K
Llama 4 Maverick
Pricing$0.19/$0.65/M$0.40/$4.00/M--
Signal Scores
Capabilities
67
83
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking
Benchmarks
76
66
Llama 4 Maverick
Pricing
99
96
Llama 4 Maverick
Context window size
96
81
Llama 4 Maverick
Recency
35
67
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking
Output Capacity
67
72
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking
Benchmark Head-to-Head(11 benchmarks)
Llama 4: 0Qwen3 VL: 1
Llama 4
Qwen3 VL
Normalized 0-100%
MMLU
88%-
MMLU-Pro
80.5%-
GPQA Diamond
69.8%-
MATH-500
81%-
HumanEval
89.5%-
IFEval
88%-
BBH
84.5%-
Arena Elo
13251395
LiveBench
62%-
HLE
5.68%-
BigCodeBench
49.7%-
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 4 MaverickStrong Performer

Scores 71/100 (rank #165), placing it in the top 43% of all 290 models tracked.

Raw Quality0/100
Cost Efficiency0/100
Speed0/100
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B ThinkingCompetitive

Scores 69/100 (rank #169), placing it in the top 42% of all 290 models tracked.

Raw Quality0/100
Cost Efficiency0/100
Speed0/100

With only a 1-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 4 Maverick when you need:

  • High-volume production workloads where API costs must be minimized
  • Processing long documents or large codebases (1049K token context)
  • Self-hosted deployments where you need full control over the model

Choose Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking when you need:

  • Step-by-step reasoning and chain-of-thought problem solving
  • Self-hosted deployments where you need full control over the model
Cost-Performance Analysis
Llama 4 MaverickBest Value
Input cost$0.19/M tokens
Output cost$0.65/M tokens
Cost per quality point$0.012
Est. monthly (1M tokens/day)$12.60
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking
Input cost$0.40/M tokens
Output cost$4.00/M tokens
Cost per quality point$0.063
Est. monthly (1M tokens/day)$66.00

Llama 4 Maverick offers 81% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $12.60/month with Llama 4 Maverick vs $66.00/month with Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking - a $53.40 monthly difference.

Latency & Speed
Llama 4 MaverickFaster
Speed score0/100
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking
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 4 Maverick

Customer support chatbot

Suitable for user-facing chat with competitive response times. Llama 4 Maverick also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support

Llama 4 Maverick

Long document analysis

Larger context window (1049K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass

Llama 4 Maverick

Batch data extraction

Lower output pricing ($0.65/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily

Llama 4 Maverick

Creative writing & content

Higher overall composite score (71/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content

Llama 4 Maverick

Image understanding & OCR

Supports vision input - can analyze screenshots, diagrams, photos, and scanned documents directly

Llama 4 Maverick
Which Should You Choose?
Our recommendation:
Llama 4 Maverick

Llama 4 Maverick and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking are extremely close in overall performance (only 1.4000000000000057 points apart). Your best choice depends entirely on which specific strengths matter most for your use case.

Llama 4 Maverick
Recommended

by Meta

  • Choose for Quality - Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
  • Choose for Cost - 81% 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 4 MaverickQwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking
Vision (Image Input)
Function Calling
Streaming
JSON Mode
Reasoningdiffers
Web Search
Image Output
Monthly Cost Calculator
1,000tokens (600 in / 400 out)
100requests/day (3,000/month)

Llama 4 Maverick

Meta

Best Value
$1.12
estimated monthly cost

Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking

Alibaba

$5.52
estimated monthly cost

Llama 4 Maverick saves you $4.40/month

That's 80% cheaper than Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking 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 4 MaverickQwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking
Context Window1.0M131K
Max Output Tokens16,38432,768
Open SourceYesYes
CreatedApr 5, 2025Sep 23, 2025
Last updated: 55m ago

相关对比

Llama 4 Maverick vs Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking (2026) | LM Market Cap