Llama 4 Scout vs Qwen3 Coder Next
Which is better for the money: Llama 4 Scout 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 11.1 points higher (21.1 vs 10.0) but costs 22× as much to run the benchmark ($247 vs $11.5; mid-range vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Qwen3 Coder Next when you need intelligence above 10.0, and Llama 4 Scout when 10.0 is enough.
| Metric | Llama 4 Scout | Qwen3 Coder Next | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 10.0 | 21.1 | +111.0% Qwen3 Coder Next is 2.1× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $11.50 | $247.26 | +2050.1% Qwen3 Coder Next is 22× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 6.48s | 6.61s | +2.0% Qwen3 Coder Next is 2.0% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.17 / $0.63 | $0.35 / $1.20 | |
| Input modalities | Not reported | Not reported |
Qwen3 Coder Next vs Llama 4 Scout: 111.0% more intelligence, 2050.1% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 2.0% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Llama 4 Scout is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
- Qwen3 Coder Next is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-5.6 Terra (medium) scores 45.60 for $240.
Llama 4 ScoutQwen3 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-4-scout/qwen3-coder-next · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/llama-4-scout/qwen3-coder-next?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill