Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct vs Qwen3.5-9B

Qwen3.5-9B leads Llama 3.1 8B Instruct on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 13.3 to 6.9, and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct costs 1.9x less per output token ($0.08 vs $0.15 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 13 benchmarks have a result for both.

Llama 3.1 8B InstructMeta Llama
Coding
No data
Overall
17.9
Output $/M
$0.08
0
Qwen3.5-9BQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.15
13
vs boards won of 13 shared

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct or Qwen3.5-9B: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Llama 3.1 8B Instruct for output tokens 1.9x cheaper ($0.08 vs $0.15 per million) and work measured by AA Coding Index or Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.

Shared results
13
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct only
38
Qwen3.5-9B only
2
Like-for-like categories
6 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct not benchmarked, Qwen3.5-9B not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 70.5 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: Llama 3.1 8B Instruct 16.4% against Qwen3.5-9B 86.8%, 70.5 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct $0.08 against Qwen3.5-9B $0.15 per million output tokens, 1.9x apart.
Context window
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct takes 131K tokens, Qwen3.5-9B 262K.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryLlama 3.1 8B InstructBarsQwen3.5-9BTies
Coding02
Intelligence02
Agentic work01
Reasoning03
Math01
General04
All shared boards013
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index02
Coding benchmarks for Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 8B InstructQwen3.5-9BLeader
AA Coding Index5.423.5Qwen3.5-9B
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)11.6%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
SciCodeNot measured29.5%Only Qwen3.5-9B measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)0.8%24.2%Qwen3.5-9B
Terminal-BenchNot measured9.2%Only Qwen3.5-9B measured
WeirdML1.7%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: coding1195Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1195Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 31 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Intelligence benchmarks for Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 8B InstructQwen3.5-9BLeader
AA Intelligence Index6.913.3Qwen3.5-9B
Epoch Capabilities Index116.5139.3Qwen3.5-9B
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 8B InstructQwen3.5-9BLeader
τ²-Bench Telecom16.4%86.8%Qwen3.5-9B
BALROG15.1%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)25.8%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index03
Reasoning benchmarks for Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 8B InstructQwen3.5-9BLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)25.9%80.6%Qwen3.5-9B
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)5.3%14.9%Qwen3.5-9B
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)27.0%79.0%Qwen3.5-9B
LMArena Text: hard prompts1175Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: expert1144Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1196Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Math benchmarks for Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 8B InstructQwen3.5-9BLeader
AA Math Index4.3Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)4.3%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
OTIS Mock AIME1.7%61.7%Qwen3.5-9B
MATH level 522.9%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
GSM8K82.4%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: math1179Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1180Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 8B InstructQwen3.5-9BLeader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)47.6%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
MMLU56.1%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: science1193Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1182Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1206Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1166Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 8B InstructQwen3.5-9BLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
General benchmarks for Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 8B InstructQwen3.5-9BLeader
IFBench28.6%66.7%Qwen3.5-9B
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)18.0%70.0%Qwen3.5-9B
DTBench50.9%71.2%Qwen3.5-9B
LMCA5.4%24.5%Qwen3.5-9B
PIQA81.2%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text1187Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1159Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1154Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: English1218Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: non-English1148Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1151Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: German1144Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1061Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: Korean1053Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: French1178Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1169Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: Russian1158Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1172Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1181Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1162Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1145Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 25 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 8B InstructQwen3.5-9BLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct$0.0001Fits in one request
Qwen3.5-9B$0.0002Fits in one request

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct$0.0027Fits in one request
Qwen3.5-9B$0.0054Fits in one request

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct$0.011Exceeds the context window
Qwen3.5-9B$0.021Fits in one request

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Qwen3.5-9B
SpecificationMeta Llama 3.1 8B InstructQwen3.5-9B
MakerMeta LlamaQwen
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedJuly 23, 2024March 10, 2026
Context window131K262K
Input $/Mtok$0.05$0.10
Output $/Mtok$0.08$0.15
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Llama 3.1 8B Instruct better than Qwen3.5-9B for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Llama 3.1 8B Instruct for output tokens 1.9x cheaper ($0.08 vs $0.15 per million) and work measured by AA Coding Index or Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Llama 3.1 8B Instruct or Qwen3.5-9B?

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct costs $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.08 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5-9B costs $0.10 and $0.15. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Llama 3.1 8B Instruct or Qwen3.5-9B?

Qwen3.5-9B, with 262K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the Llama 3.1 8B Instruct vs Qwen3.5-9B comparison based on?

13 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Llama 3.1 8B Instruct's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen3.5-9B's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next