ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Codestral-22B-v0.1 vs Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct vs Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct

Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct comes out ahead, 58 to 51 and 33 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Mistral AI

    Codestral-22B-v0.1

    Released May 29, 2024

    33/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.30 / $0.90
    • Context33K
  2. Our pick

    Meta

    Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct

    Released Sep 25, 2024

    58/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.197 / $0.51
    • Context128K
  3. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct

    Released Sep 2024

    51/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.35 / $1.05
    • Context131K
01 — Verdict

Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct is our pick

Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct is the better all-round choice, scoring 58/100 against Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct (51) and Codestral-22B-v0.1 (33). It leads on price. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.

  • CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
  • Lowest priceLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-InstructLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct $0.275 · Codestral-22B-v0.1 $0.45 · Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct $0.525 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextQwen2.5-VL 7B InstructQwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct 131,072 · Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct 128,000 · Codestral-22B-v0.1 32,768 tokens
  • Widest inputsLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct and Qwen2.5-VL 7B InstructCodestral-22B-v0.1: Text · Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct: Text, Images · Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct: Text, Images
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightCodestral-22B-v0.1Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-InstructQwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct
Price50%667663
Inputs & features30%05050
Context window20%02424
Overall100%33/10058/10051/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.

02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Codestral-22B-v0.1 vs Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct vs Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct specifications side by side
SpecificationCodestral-22B-v0.1Mistral AILlama-3.2-11B-Vision-InstructMetaQwen2.5-VL 7B InstructAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)———
ECI rank———
Price per million tokens
Input$0.30$0.197 (best)$0.35
Output$0.90$0.51 (best)$1.05
Cached input———
Blended (3:1)$0.45$0.275 (best)$0.525
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 1 providersMedian of 2 providersOfficial Alibaba API
Limits
Context window32,768 tokens128,000 tokens131,072 tokens (best)
Max output8,192 tokens (best)4,096 tokens8,192 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesNoYesYes
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoNoNoNo
ReasoningNoNoNo
Tool callingNoYesYes
Structured outputNoNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenMistral AI Non-Production LicenseOpenOpen
API model ID——qwen2-5-vl-7b-instruct
API providers12 (best)1
ReleasedMay 29, 2024Sep 25, 2024Sep 2024
Knowledge cutoff—Dec 2023Apr 2024
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Codestral-22B-v0.1$4.80
  • Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct$2.99
  • Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct$5.60
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Codestral-22B-v0.1, Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct or Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct?

Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct is the better all-round choice, scoring 58/100 against Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct (51) and Codestral-22B-v0.1 (33). It leads on price. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.

Which is cheaper, Codestral-22B-v0.1, Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct or Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct?

Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct is cheaper at $0.197 input / $0.51 output per million tokens (median across 2 API providers). Codestral-22B-v0.1 costs $0.30 input / $0.90 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider); Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct costs $0.35 input / $1.05 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.275 per million tokens for Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct versus $0.45 for Codestral-22B-v0.1 (1.6× as much) and $0.525 for Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct (1.9× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Codestral-22B-v0.1 has not been scored yet, Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct has not been scored yet and Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Codestral-22B-v0.1, Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct and Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that Codestral-22B-v0.1 does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct has the largest context window at 131,072 tokens, against 128,000 for Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct and 32,768 for Codestral-22B-v0.1. Maximum output per response: Codestral-22B-v0.1 up to 8,192, Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct up to 4,096, Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct up to 8,192 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Codestral-22B-v0.1 accepts text; Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct accepts text and images; Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct accepts text and images. Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Yes, all three publish their weights (Mistral AI Non-Production License), so you can self-host them.

Which is newer?

Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct is the newest, released Sep 25, 2024. Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct came out Sep 2024; Codestral-22B-v0.1 came out May 29, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct Dec 2023, Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct Apr 2024.

How do you decide the winner?

Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.