Price Per TokenPrice Per Token
Meta-llama
Meta-llama
vs
Qwen
Qwen

Llama 3.1 70B Instruct vs Qwen3.5 397B A17B

A detailed comparison of pricing, benchmarks, and capabilities

Get our weekly newsletter on pricing changes, new releases, and tools.

Join the Price Per Token Community

Key Takeaways

Llama 3.1 70B Instruct wins:

  • Cheaper input tokens
  • Cheaper output tokens
  • Better at math

Qwen3.5 397B A17B wins:

  • Larger context window
  • Faster response time
  • Higher intelligence benchmark
  • Better at coding
  • Supports vision
Price Advantage
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
Benchmark Advantage
Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Context Window
Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Speed
Qwen3.5 397B A17B

Pricing Comparison

Benchmark Comparison

Context & Performance

Capabilities

Feature Comparison

FeatureLlama 3.1 70B InstructQwen3.5 397B A17B
Vision (Image Input)
Tool/Function Calls
Reasoning Mode
Audio Input
Audio Output
PDF Input
Prompt Caching
Web Search

License & Release

PropertyLlama 3.1 70B InstructQwen3.5 397B A17B
LicenseOpen SourceOpen Source
AuthorMeta-llamaQwen
ReleasedJul 2024Feb 2026

Llama 3.1 70B Instruct Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

Qwen3.5 397B A17B Modalities

Input
textimagevideo
Output
text

Frequently Asked Questions

Llama 3.1 70B Instruct has cheaper input pricing at $0.34/M tokens. Llama 3.1 70B Instruct has cheaper output pricing at $0.39/M tokens.
Qwen3.5 397B A17B scores higher on coding benchmarks with a score of 37.4, compared to Llama 3.1 70B Instruct's score of 10.9.
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct has a 131,072 token context window, while Qwen3.5 397B A17B has a 262,144 token context window.
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct does not support vision. Qwen3.5 397B A17B supports vision.