Qwen-VL OCR vs Llama-3.2-3B vs Nova Lite
Nova Lite comes out ahead, 75 to 55 and 50 on our weighted score, though Qwen-VL OCR is 12% cheaper per token.
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen-VL OCR
55/100- ECI—
- Price$0.07 / $0.16
- Context34K
MetaLlama-3.2-3B
50/100- ECI—
- Price$0.051 / $0.333
- Context131K
- Our pick
AmazonNova Lite
75/100- ECI—
- Price$0.06 / $0.24
- Context300K
Nova Lite is our pick
Nova Lite is the better all-round choice, scoring 75/100 against Qwen-VL OCR (55) and Llama-3.2-3B (50). It leads on inputs & features and context window. Qwen-VL OCR 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 priceQwen-VL OCRQwen-VL OCR $0.092 · Nova Lite $0.105 · Llama-3.2-3B $0.121 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextNova LiteNova Lite 300,000 · Llama-3.2-3B 131,072 · Qwen-VL OCR 34,096 tokens
- Widest inputsNova LiteQwen-VL OCR: Text, Images · Llama-3.2-3B: Text · Nova Lite: Text, Images, PDFs, Video
- Self-hostingLlama-3.2-3BPublishes downloadable weights (Llama 3.2 Community License)
| Measure | Weight | Qwen-VL OCR | Llama-3.2-3B | Nova Lite |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 95 | 89 | 92 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 25 | 0 | 70 |
| Context window | 20% | 1 | 25 | 39 |
| Overall | 100% | 55/100 | 50/100 | 75/100 |
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-3.2-3BMeta | Nova LiteAmazon |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.07 | $0.051 (best) | $0.06 |
| Output | $0.16 (best) | $0.333 | $0.24 |
| Cached input | — | — | $0.015 |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.092 (best) | $0.121 | $0.105 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Alibaba API | Median of 6 providers | Official Amazon Bedrock API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 34,096 tokens | 131,072 tokens | 300,000 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 4,096 tokens | 8,192 tokens | 10,000 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | No | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No | Yes |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | Yes |
| Reasoning | No | No | No |
| Tool calling | No | No | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Proprietary | OpenLlama 3.2 Community License | Proprietary |
| API model ID | qwen-vl-ocr | — | amazon.nova-lite-v1:0 |
| API providers | 1 | 6 | 8 (best) |
| Released | Oct 28, 2024 | Sep 25, 2024 | Dec 3, 2024 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Apr 2024 | Dec 2023 | Oct 2024 |
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$1.02
- Llama-3.2-3B$1.17
- Nova Lite$1.08
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Qwen-VL OCR, Llama-3.2-3B or Nova Lite?
Nova Lite is the better all-round choice, scoring 75/100 against Qwen-VL OCR (55) and Llama-3.2-3B (50). It leads on inputs & features and context window. Qwen-VL OCR 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, Qwen-VL OCR, Llama-3.2-3B or Nova Lite?
Qwen-VL OCR is cheaper at $0.07 input / $0.16 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). Nova Lite costs $0.06 input / $0.24 output per million tokens (official Amazon Bedrock API price); Llama-3.2-3B costs $0.051 input / $0.333 output per million tokens (median across 6 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.092 per million tokens for Qwen-VL OCR versus $0.105 for Nova Lite (1.1× as much) and $0.121 for Llama-3.2-3B (1.3× 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-3.2-3B has not been scored yet and Nova Lite has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen-VL OCR, Llama-3.2-3B and Nova Lite yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that Qwen-VL OCR and Llama-3.2-3B does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.
Which has the bigger context window?
Nova Lite has the largest context window at 300,000 tokens, against 131,072 for Llama-3.2-3B and 34,096 for Qwen-VL OCR. Maximum output per response: Qwen-VL OCR up to 4,096, Llama-3.2-3B up to 8,192, Nova Lite up to 10,000 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Qwen-VL OCR accepts text and images; Llama-3.2-3B accepts text; Nova Lite accepts text, images, PDFs and video. Nova Lite handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Llama-3.2-3B publishes its weights (Llama 3.2 Community License) and can be self-hosted; Qwen-VL OCR and Nova Lite is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Nova Lite is the newest, released Dec 3, 2024. Qwen-VL OCR came out Oct 28, 2024; Llama-3.2-3B came out Sep 25, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Qwen-VL OCR Apr 2024, Llama-3.2-3B Dec 2023, Nova Lite Oct 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 Nov 2, 2026.
