Llama 3.1 8B Instruct vs Qwen3 8B
Wins 1 of 6 areas
Long documents
Wins 3 of 6 areas
Coding · Agents · Following instructions
Qwen3 8B wins more areas, narrowly.Llama 3.1 8B Instruct is cheaper and better at long documents.
Scores updated · 21 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the six areas where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- CodingWriting and fixing software02Qwen3 8B2 of 2 tests
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own01Qwen3 8B1 of 2 tests · 1 tie
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked01Qwen3 8B1 of 1 test
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts10Llama 3.1 8B Instruct1 of 1 test
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking11Even1 each · 1 tie
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up11Even1 each
Long documents and following instructions rest on a single test each.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct costs 92% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The tests each model wins by the widest margin, up to three each. Scores are out of 100.
Where Qwen3 8B pulls ahead
- Graduate-level biology, physics and chemistry questionsGPQA Diamond+33points ahead
- Code for real scientific research problemsSciCode+14.7points ahead
- Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+5.1points ahead
Where Llama 3.1 8B Instruct pulls ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+47.7points ahead
- Very hard expert questions across many subjectsHumanity's Last Exam+1.4points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 21 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingQwen3 8B
- SciCodeQwen3 8B by 14.713.227.9+14.7
- Terminal-Bench HardQwen3 8B by 1.50.82.3+1.5
ReasoningEven
- GPQA DiamondQwen3 8B by 3325.958.9+33
- Humanity's Last ExamLlama 3.1 8B Instruct by 1.45.33.9+1.4
- CritPttie00tie
FactsEven
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationLlama 3.1 8B Instruct by 47.7579.3+47.7
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyQwen3 8B by 5.18.513.6+5.1
Long documentsLlama 3.1 8B Instruct
- AA-LCRLlama 3.1 8B Instruct by 18180+18
Other results10 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- AA-OmniscienceLlama 3.1 8B Instruct by 33.8-30.9-64.7+33.8
- MHPPQwen3 8B by 15.717.132.8+15.7
- HumanEvalQwen3 8B by 12.272.684.8+12.2
- LiveCodeBench (v5)Qwen3 8B by 1211.523.5+12
- τ²-Bench Telecom (AA run)Qwen3 8B by 11.416.427.8+11.4
- BigCodeBench (Full)Qwen3 8B by 11.240.551.7+11.2
- BigCodeBench (Hard)Qwen3 8B by 9.513.523+9.5
- MBPPQwen3 8B by 6.970.177+6.9
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexQwen3 8B by 3.65.49+3.6
- AA Intelligencetie6.97.3tie
Questions people ask
Which is better, Llama 3.1 8B Instruct or Qwen3 8B?
Qwen3 8B wins three of the six areas where both have results: coding, agents and following instructions. Llama 3.1 8B Instruct wins long documents, and costs 92% less. They are level on reasoning and facts.
Which is better for coding?
Qwen3 8B. It wins 2 of the 2 coding tests both models report; Llama 3.1 8B Instruct wins none.
Which is cheaper?
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct costs $0.02 per million input tokens and $0.05 per million output tokens; Qwen3 8B costs $0.18 and $0.70. That makes Llama 3.1 8B Instruct about 92% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 21 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 11 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 10 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.