Llama 4 Scout vs Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Reasoning)
Which is better for the money: Llama 4 Scout by Meta or Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Reasoning) by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Reasoning) scores 9.1 points higher (15.6 vs 6.5) but costs 9.0× as much to run the benchmark ($661 vs $73.6; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Reasoning) when you need intelligence above 6.5, and Llama 4 Scout when 6.5 is enough.
| Metric | Llama 4 Scout | Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Reasoning) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 6.5 | 15.6 | +140.0% Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Re… is 2.4× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $73.56 | $661.29 | +799.0% Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Re… is 9.0× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 6.47s | 21.37s | +230.3% Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Re… is 230.3% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.18 / $0.66 | $0.40 / $3.20 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Reasoning) vs Llama 4 Scout: 140.0% more intelligence, 799.0% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 230.3% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Llama 4 Scout is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Xhigh) scores 34.60 for $66.8.
- Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (High) scores 50.20 for $521.
Llama 4 ScoutQwen3.5 122B A10B (Reasoning)Today's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/llama-4-scout/qwen3-5-122b-a10b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/llama-4-scout/qwen3-5-122b-a10b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill