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

Llama 3.2 11B Vision Instruct vs Qwen3.5 9B

A detailed comparison of pricing, benchmarks, and capabilities

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

OpenClaw

Deploy OpenClaw in Under 1 Minute We handle hosting, scaling, and maintenance

Key Takeaways

Llama 3.2 11B Vision Instruct wins:

  • Cheaper output tokens
  • Better at math
  • Supports vision

Qwen3.5 9B wins:

  • Cheaper input tokens
  • Larger context window
  • Faster response time
  • Higher intelligence benchmark
  • Better at coding
Price Advantage
Llama 3.2 11B Vision Instruct
Benchmark Advantage
Qwen3.5 9B
Context Window
Qwen3.5 9B
Speed
Qwen3.5 9B

Pricing Comparison

Benchmark Comparison

Context & Performance

Capabilities

Feature Comparison

FeatureLlama 3.2 11B Vision InstructQwen3.5 9B
Vision (Image Input)
Tool/Function Calls
Reasoning Mode
Audio Input
Audio Output
PDF Input
Prompt Caching
Web Search

License & Release

PropertyLlama 3.2 11B Vision InstructQwen3.5 9B
LicenseOpen SourceOpen Source
AuthorMeta-llamaQwen
ReleasedSep 2024Mar 2026

Llama 3.2 11B Vision Instruct Modalities

Input
textimage
Output
text

Qwen3.5 9B Modalities

Input
textimagevideo
Output
text

Related Comparisons

Compare Llama 3.2 11B Vision Instruct with:

Compare Qwen3.5 9B with:

Frequently Asked Questions

Qwen3.5 9B has cheaper input pricing at $0.04/M tokens. Llama 3.2 11B Vision Instruct has cheaper output pricing at $0.05/M tokens.
Qwen3.5 9B scores higher on coding benchmarks with a score of 21.4, compared to Llama 3.2 11B Vision Instruct's score of 4.3.
Llama 3.2 11B Vision Instruct has a 131,072 token context window, while Qwen3.5 9B has a 262,144 token context window.
Llama 3.2 11B Vision Instruct supports vision. Qwen3.5 9B does not support vision.