+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Llama 4 Scout vs Qwen3 32B
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Qwen3 32B leads with 32.9% higher average benchmark score. Llama 4 Scout offers 19.7M more tokens in context window than Qwen3 32B. Both models have similar pricing. Llama 4 Scout supports multimodal inputs. Llama 4 Scout is available on 6 providers. Overall, Qwen3 32B is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
Meta
Llama 4 Scout was created as an exploratory variant in the Llama 4 family, designed to investigate new architectures and optimization strategies. Built as part of Meta's commitment to advancing open-source AI, it serves as a testbed for innovations that may inform future model releases.
+
+
+
+
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3 32B was developed as a dense 32-billion-parameter model in the Qwen3 family, designed to provide strong language understanding without mixture-of-experts complexity. Built for applications requiring straightforward deployment and reliable performance, it serves as a capable mid-to-large-scale foundation model.
24 days newer
Llama 4 Scout
Meta
2025-04-05
Qwen3 32B
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
2025-04-29
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Pricing Comparison
Cost per million tokens (USD)
+
+
+
+
Llama 4 Scout
Input:$0.08
Output:$0.30($0.02 cheaper)
+
+
+
+
Qwen3 32B
Input:$0.10
Output:$0.30
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 1 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Llama 4 Scout
Average Score:32.8%
+
+
+
+
Qwen3 32B
Average Score:65.7%(+32.9%)
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
Llama 4 Scout
6 providers
DeepInfra
Throughput: 76.1 tok/s
Latency: 0.31ms
Fireworks
Throughput: 116.1 tok/s
Latency: 0.53ms
Groq
Throughput: 776.1 tok/s
Latency: 1.08ms
Lambda
Throughput: 139.7 tok/s
Latency: 0.43ms
Novita
+
+
+
+
Llama 4 Scout
Avg Score:32.8%
Providers:6
+
+
+
+
Qwen3 32B
Avg Score:65.7%(+32.9%)
Providers:3