Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Llama 3.2 3B Instruct vs Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507

Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 leads Llama 3.2 3B Instruct on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 7.5 to 5.7, at about the same output price ($0.30 vs $0.3325 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 34 benchmarks have a result for both.

Llama 3.2 3B InstructMeta Llama
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.3325
0
Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507Qwen
Coding
No data
Overall
41.5
Output $/M
$0.30
34
vs boards won of 34 shared

Llama 3.2 3B Instruct or Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507: which to pick

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

Pick Llama 3.2 3B Instruct for work measured by LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) or LMArena Text: coding, where it leads.

Shared results
34
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct only
1
Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 only
11
Like-for-like categories
7 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 3.2 3B Instruct not benchmarked, Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Coding, 55.9 points apart on average over 3 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
LMArena Text: Chinese: Llama 3.2 3B Instruct 1017 against Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 1432, 69.2 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct $0.3325 against Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 $0.30 per million output tokens, 1.1x apart.
Context window
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct takes 131K tokens, Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 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 3.2 3B InstructBarsQwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507Ties
Coding03
Intelligence01
Agentic work02
Reasoning05
Math04
Knowledge05
General014
All shared boards034
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index03
Coding benchmarks for Llama 3.2 3B Instruct and Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 3B InstructQwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507Leader
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)8.3%70.7%Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
SciCodeNot measured33.0%Only Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured6.1%Only Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 measured
LMArena Text: coding10981416Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: software and IT11031417Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for Llama 3.2 3B Instruct and Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 3B InstructQwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507Leader
AA Intelligence Index5.77.5Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Agentic work benchmarks for Llama 3.2 3B Instruct and Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 3B InstructQwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507Leader
τ²-Bench Telecom21.1%28.1%Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
BALROG10.1%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)21.9%41.4%Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index05
Reasoning benchmarks for Llama 3.2 3B Instruct and Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 3B InstructQwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507Leader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)25.5%70.7%Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)5.3%10.3%Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured55.6%Only Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts10951398Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: expert10901397Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English11411406Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Math benchmarks for Llama 3.2 3B Instruct and Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 3B InstructQwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507Leader
AA Math Index3.366.3Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)3.3%66.3%Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured62.2%Only Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 measured
LMArena Text: math11261394Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: mathematical work11281411Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index05
Knowledge benchmarks for Llama 3.2 3B Instruct and Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 3B InstructQwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507Leader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)34.7%80.5%Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: science11061393Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare11041392Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: legal and government11151387Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: business and finance10741389Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Llama 3.2 3B Instruct and Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 3B InstructQwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507Leader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index014
General benchmarks for Llama 3.2 3B Instruct and Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 3B InstructQwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507Leader
IFBench26.2%50.7%Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)4.3%61.3%Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
DTBenchNot measured67.2%Only Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 measured
LMCANot measured22.4%Only Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 measured
LMArena Text11101384Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: instruction following10891363Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: creative writing10941317Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: English11801391Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: non-English10191372Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: Chinese10171432Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: German10561379Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1337Only Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1330Only Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1419Only Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1404Only Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 measured
LMArena Text: Russian9491369Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1353Only Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn11051378Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: longer queries11001378Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: writing and language10961336Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: entertainment and media10831334Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
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 3.2 3B Instruct and Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 3B InstructQwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507Leader
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 3.2 3B Instruct$0.0002Fits in one request
Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507$0.0002Fits in one request

Llama 3.2 3B Instruct costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Llama 3.2 3B Instruct$0.0035Fits in one request
Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507$0.0054Fits in one request

Llama 3.2 3B Instruct costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Llama 3.2 3B Instruct$0.013Exceeds the context window
Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507$0.021Fits in one request

Llama 3.2 3B 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 3.2 3B Instruct and Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
SpecificationMeta Llama 3.2 3B InstructQwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
MakerMeta LlamaQwen
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedSeptember 25, 2024July 29, 2025
Context window131K262K
Input $/Mtok$0.0505$0.09
Output $/Mtok$0.3325$0.30
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Llama 3.2 3B Instruct better than Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Llama 3.2 3B Instruct for work measured by LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) or LMArena Text: coding, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Llama 3.2 3B Instruct or Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507?

Llama 3.2 3B Instruct costs $0.0505 per million input tokens and $0.3325 per million output tokens; Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 costs $0.09 and $0.30. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Llama 3.2 3B Instruct or Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507?

Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507, with 262K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the Llama 3.2 3B Instruct vs Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 comparison based on?

34 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Llama 3.2 3B Instruct's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next