Llama 3.3 Instruct 70B vs Qwen3 Coder Next
Which is better for the money: Llama 3.3 Instruct 70B by Meta or Qwen3 Coder Next by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-07-17.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Qwen3 Coder Next scores 11.7 points higher (21.1 vs 9.4) but costs 3.2× as much to run the benchmark ($247 vs $78.0; both mid-range class). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Qwen3 Coder Next when you need intelligence above 9.4, and Llama 3.3 Instruct 70B when 9.4 is enough.
| Metric | Llama 3.3 Instruct 70B | Qwen3 Coder Next | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 9.4 | 21.1 | +124.5% Qwen3 Coder Next is 2.2× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $77.98 | $247.26 | +217.1% Qwen3 Coder Next is 3.2× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 7.50s | 6.61s | −11.9% Qwen3 Coder Next is 11.9% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.58 / $0.71 | $0.35 / $1.20 | |
| Input modalities | Not reported | Not reported |
Qwen3 Coder Next vs Llama 3.3 Instruct 70B: 124.5% more intelligence, 217.1% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 11.9% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Llama 3.3 Instruct 70B is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, DeepSeek V4 Flash (Reasoning, Max Effort) scores 40.30 for $74.3.
- Qwen3 Coder Next is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-5.6 Terra (medium) scores 45.60 for $240.
Llama 3.3 Instruct 70BQwen3 Coder NextToday's Pareto frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/llama-3-3-instruct-70b/qwen3-coder-next · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/llama-3-3-instruct-70b/qwen3-coder-next?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill