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 2026-09-09.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Qwen3 Coder Next scores 3.6 points higher (10.1 vs 6.5) but costs 6.1× as much to run the benchmark ($476 vs $77.6; both mid-range class). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Qwen3 Coder Next when you need intelligence above 6.5, and Llama 4 Scout when 6.5 is enough.
| Metric | Llama 4 Scout | Qwen3 Coder Next | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 6.5 | 10.1 | +55.4% Qwen3 Coder Next is 55.4% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $77.58 | $476.03 | +513.6% Qwen3 Coder Next is 6.1× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 6.23s | 5.52s | −11.4% Qwen3 Coder Next is 11.4% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.19 / $0.68 | $0.35 / $1.20 | |
| Input modalities | Not reported | Not reported |
Qwen3 Coder Next vs Llama 4 Scout: 55.4% more intelligence, 513.6% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 11.4% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Llama 4 Scout is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.5 scores 22.30 for $42.6.
- Qwen3 Coder Next is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GLM-5.3-Flash scores 41.90 for $280.
Llama 4 ScoutQwen3 Coder NextToday'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-coder-next · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/llama-4-scout/qwen3-coder-next?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill