ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct vs Qwen3 8B

Too close to call on our weighted score (Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct 58, Qwen3 8B 56). The right pick depends on what you value most.

  1. Meta

    Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct

    Released Apr 5, 2025

    58/100
    • ECI132.2
    • Price$0.321 / $0.91
    • Context1M
    Full specs Remove Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct

  2. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3 8B

    Released Apr 28, 2025

    56/100
    • ECI136.2
    • Price$0.18 / $0.70
    • Context131K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3 8B

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Too close to call

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 1 points (Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct 58/100, Qwen3 8B 56/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Qwen3 8B for raw capability and Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct for long inputs. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityQwen3 8BCapabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3 8B 136.2 · Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct 132.2
  • Lowest priceQwen3 8BQwen3 8B $0.31 · Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct $0.468 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextLlama 4 Maverick 17B InstructLlama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct 1,000,000 · Qwen3 8B 131,072 tokens
  • Widest inputsLlama 4 Maverick 17B InstructLlama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct: Text, Images · Qwen3 8B: Text
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightLlama 4 Maverick 17B InstructQwen3 8B
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%5661
Price25%6674
Inputs & features15%5035
Context window10%6024
Overall100%58/10056/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

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

Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct vs Qwen3 8B specifications side by side
SpecificationLlama 4 Maverick 17B InstructMetaQwen3 8BAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)132.2136.2 (best)
ECI rank#122 of 148#113 of 148 (best)
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions67.0% (best)56.8%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics20.6%56.1% (best)
Price per million tokens
Input$0.321$0.18 (best)
Output$0.91$0.70 (best)
Cached input——
Blended (3:1)$0.468$0.31 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 6 providersOfficial Alibaba API
Limits
Context window1,000,000 tokens (best)131,072 tokens
Max output16,384 tokens (best)8,192 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesNo
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoNo
VideoNoNo
ReasoningNoYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenOpen
API model ID—qwen3-8b
API providers6 (best)1
ReleasedApr 5, 2025Apr 28, 2025
Knowledge cutoffAug 2024Apr 2025
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 4 Maverick 17B Instruct$5.03
  • Qwen3 8B$3.20
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct or Qwen3 8B?

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 1 points (Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct 58/100, Qwen3 8B 56/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Qwen3 8B for raw capability and Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct for long inputs. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct or Qwen3 8B?

Qwen3 8B is cheaper at $0.18 input / $0.70 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct costs $0.321 input / $0.91 output per million tokens (median across 6 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.31 per million tokens for Qwen3 8B versus $0.468 for Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct (1.5× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Qwen3 8B scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3 8B 136.2 (#113 of 148) and Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct 132.2 (#122 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (129.7–138.1 vs 128.0–134.1), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct 67.0%, Qwen3 8B 56.8%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Qwen3 8B 56.1%, Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct 20.6%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct and Qwen3 8B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Qwen3 8B leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 131,072 for Qwen3 8B. Maximum output per response: Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct up to 16,384, Qwen3 8B up to 8,192 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct accepts text and images; Qwen3 8B accepts text. Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Yes, both publish their weights, so you can self-host them.

Which is newer?

Qwen3 8B is the newest, released Apr 28, 2025. Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct came out Apr 5, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Llama 4 Maverick 17B Instruct Aug 2024, Qwen3 8B Apr 2025.

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