Qwen-VL OCR vs Llama-3.2-1B vs Aya Expanse 32B
Llama-3.2-1B comes out ahead, 55 to 36 and 33 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen-VL OCR
36/100- ECI—
- Price$0.72 / $0.72
- Context34K
- Our pick
MetaLlama-3.2-1B
55/100- ECI102.0
- Price$0.064 / $0.15
- Context131K
CohereAya Expanse 32B
33/100- ECI—
- Price$0.50 / $1.50
- Context128K
Llama-3.2-1B is our pick
Llama-3.2-1B is the better all-round choice, scoring 55/100 against Qwen-VL OCR (36) and Aya Expanse 32B (33). It leads on price. Qwen-VL OCR wins on inputs & features. 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-3.2-1BLlama-3.2-1B $0.085 · Qwen-VL OCR $0.72 · Aya Expanse 32B $0.75 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextLlama-3.2-1BLlama-3.2-1B 131,072 · Aya Expanse 32B 128,000 · Qwen-VL OCR 34,096 tokens
- Widest inputsQwen-VL OCRQwen-VL OCR: Text, Images · Llama-3.2-1B: Text · Aya Expanse 32B: Text
- Self-hostingLlama-3.2-1B and Aya Expanse 32BPublishes downloadable weights (Llama 3.2 Community License and CC-BY-NC-4.0)
| Measure | Weight | Qwen-VL OCR | Llama-3.2-1B | Aya Expanse 32B |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 57 | 100 | 56 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 25 | 0 | 0 |
| Context window | 20% | 1 | 24 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 36/100 | 55/100 | 33/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Qwen-VL OCRAlibaba (Qwen) | Llama-3.2-1BMeta | Aya Expanse 32BCohere |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | 102.0 | — |
| ECI rank | — | #147 of 148 | — |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | — | 23.9% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | — | 0.6% | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.72 | $0.064 (best) | $0.50 |
| Output | $0.72 | $0.15 (best) | $1.50 |
| Cached input | — | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.72 | $0.085 (best) | $0.75 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Alibaba API | Median of 2 providers | Median of 1 providers |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 34,096 tokens | 131,072 tokens (best) | 128,000 tokens |
| Max output | 4,096 tokens | 8,192 tokens (best) | 4,000 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | No | No |
| Tool calling | No | No | No |
| Structured output | No | No | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Proprietary | OpenLlama 3.2 Community License | OpenCC-BY-NC-4.0 |
| API model ID | qwen-vl-ocr | — | c4ai-aya-expanse-32b |
| API providers | 1 | 2 (best) | 2 (best) |
| Released | Oct 28, 2024 | Sep 25, 2024 | Oct 24, 2024 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Apr 2024 | Dec 2023 | — |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Qwen-VL OCR$8.64
- Llama-3.2-1B$0.936
- Aya Expanse 32B$8.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Qwen-VL OCR, Llama-3.2-1B or Aya Expanse 32B?
Llama-3.2-1B is the better all-round choice, scoring 55/100 against Qwen-VL OCR (36) and Aya Expanse 32B (33). It leads on price. Qwen-VL OCR wins on inputs & features. 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, Qwen-VL OCR, Llama-3.2-1B or Aya Expanse 32B?
Llama-3.2-1B is cheaper at $0.064 input / $0.15 output per million tokens (median across 2 API providers). Qwen-VL OCR costs $0.72 input / $0.72 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price); Aya Expanse 32B costs $0.50 input / $1.50 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.085 per million tokens for Llama-3.2-1B versus $0.72 for Qwen-VL OCR (8.5× as much) and $0.75 for Aya Expanse 32B (8.8× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Qwen-VL OCR has not been scored yet, Llama-3.2-1B has an ECI of 102.0 and Aya Expanse 32B has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen-VL OCR, Llama-3.2-1B and Aya Expanse 32B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that Qwen-VL OCR, Llama-3.2-1B and Aya Expanse 32B does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.
Which has the bigger context window?
Llama-3.2-1B has the largest context window at 131,072 tokens, against 128,000 for Aya Expanse 32B and 34,096 for Qwen-VL OCR. Maximum output per response: Qwen-VL OCR up to 4,096, Llama-3.2-1B up to 8,192, Aya Expanse 32B up to 4,000 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Qwen-VL OCR accepts text and images; Llama-3.2-1B accepts text; Aya Expanse 32B accepts text. Qwen-VL OCR handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Llama-3.2-1B and Aya Expanse 32B publishes its weights (Llama 3.2 Community License and CC-BY-NC-4.0) and can be self-hosted; Qwen-VL OCR is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Qwen-VL OCR is the newest, released Oct 28, 2024. Aya Expanse 32B came out Oct 24, 2024; Llama-3.2-1B came out Sep 25, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Qwen-VL OCR Apr 2024, Llama-3.2-1B 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.
