ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct vs Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B

Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct comes out ahead, 58 to 49 on our weighted score, though Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B is 2.8× cheaper per token.

  1. Our pick

    Meta

    Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct

    Released Sep 25, 2024

    58/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.197 / $0.51
    • Context128K
    Full specs Remove Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct

  2. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B

    Released Nov 12, 2024

    49/100
    • ECI88.2
    • Price$0.10 / $0.10
    • Context33K
    Full specs Remove Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

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-Coder-0.5B (49). It leads on inputs & features and context window. Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B wins 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 priceQwen2.5-Coder-0.5BQwen2.5-Coder-0.5B $0.10 · Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct $0.275 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-InstructLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct 128,000 · Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B 32,768 tokens
  • Widest inputsLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-InstructLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct: Text, Images · Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B: Text
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-InstructQwen2.5-Coder-0.5B
Price50%7697
Inputs & features30%500
Context window20%240
Overall100%58/10049/100

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.

Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct vs Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B specifications side by side
SpecificationLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-InstructMetaQwen2.5-Coder-0.5BAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)—88.2
ECI rank—#148 of 148
Price per million tokens
Input$0.197$0.10 (best)
Output$0.51$0.10 (best)
Cached input——
Blended (3:1)$0.275$0.10 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 2 providersMedian of 1 providers
Limits
Context window128,000 tokens (best)32,768 tokens
Max output4,096 tokens8,192 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesNo
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoNo
VideoNoNo
ReasoningNoNo
Tool callingYesNo
Structured outputNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenOpenApache 2.0
API model ID——
API providers2 (best)1
ReleasedSep 25, 2024Nov 12, 2024
Knowledge cutoffDec 2023—
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.

  • Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct$2.99
  • Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B$1.20
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct or Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B?

Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct is the better all-round choice, scoring 58/100 against Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B (49). It leads on inputs & features and context window. Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B wins 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, Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct or Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B?

Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B is cheaper at $0.10 input / $0.10 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct costs $0.197 input / $0.51 output per million tokens (median across 2 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.10 per million tokens for Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B versus $0.275 for Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct (2.8× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct has not been scored yet and Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B has an ECI of 88.2.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct and Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.

Which has the bigger context window?

Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct has the largest context window at 128,000 tokens, against 32,768 for Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B. Maximum output per response: Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct up to 4,096, Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B up to 8,192 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct accepts text and images; Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B accepts text. Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Yes, both publish their weights (Apache 2.0), so you can self-host them.

Which is newer?

Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B is the newest, released Nov 12, 2024. Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct came out Sep 25, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct Dec 2023.

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.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons