ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B vs Codestral vs Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct

Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B comes out ahead, 59 to 48 and 45 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Our pick

    Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B

    Released Apr 2025

    59/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.20 / $0.80
    • Context131K
  2. Mistral AI

    Codestral

    Released May 29, 2024

    48/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.30 / $0.90
    • Context256K
  3. NVIDIA

    Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct

    Released Apr 15, 2025

    45/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.478 / $0.504
    • Context128K
01 — Verdict

Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B is our pick

Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B is the better all-round choice, scoring 59/100 against Codestral (48) and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct (45). It leads on price and inputs & features. Codestral wins on context window. 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 priceQwen3-VL 30B-A3BQwen3-VL 30B-A3B $0.35 · Codestral $0.45 · Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct $0.485 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextCodestralCodestral 256,000 · Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B 131,072 · Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct 128,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsQwen3-VL 30B-A3BQwen3-VL 30B-A3B: Text, Images · Codestral: Text · Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct: Text
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightQwen3-VL 30B-A3BCodestralLlama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct
Price50%726665
Inputs & features30%602525
Context window20%243624
Overall100%59/10048/10045/100

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.

Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B vs Codestral vs Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct specifications side by side
SpecificationQwen3-VL 30B-A3BAlibaba (Qwen)CodestralMistral AILlama 3.1 Nemotron 70B InstructNVIDIA
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)———
ECI rank———
Price per million tokens
Input$0.20 (best)$0.30$0.478
Output$0.80$0.90$0.504 (best)
Cached input—$0.03—
Blended (3:1)$0.35 (best)$0.45$0.485
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Alibaba APIOfficial Mistral APIMedian of 2 providers
Limits
Context window131,072 tokens256,000 tokens (best)128,000 tokens
Max output32,768 tokens (best)4,096 tokens8,192 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesYesNoNo
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoNoNoNo
ReasoningYesNoNo
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputNoNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenOpenOpen
API model IDqwen3-vl-30b-a3bcodestral-latestnvidia/llama-3.1-nemotron-70b-instruct
API providers13 (best)3 (best)
ReleasedApr 2025May 29, 2024Apr 15, 2025
Knowledge cutoffApr 2025Oct 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.

  • Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B$3.60
  • Codestral$4.80
  • Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct$5.79
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B, Codestral or Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct?

Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B is the better all-round choice, scoring 59/100 against Codestral (48) and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct (45). It leads on price and inputs & features. Codestral wins on context window. 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, Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B, Codestral or Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct?

Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B is cheaper at $0.20 input / $0.80 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). Codestral costs $0.30 input / $0.90 output per million tokens (official Mistral API price); Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct costs $0.478 input / $0.504 output per million tokens (median across 2 API providers; free on Nvidia). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.35 per million tokens for Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B versus $0.45 for Codestral (1.3× as much) and $0.485 for Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct (1.4× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B has not been scored yet, Codestral has not been scored yet and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B, Codestral and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Codestral has the largest context window at 256,000 tokens, against 131,072 for Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B and 128,000 for Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct. Maximum output per response: Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B up to 32,768, Codestral up to 4,096, Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct up to 8,192 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B accepts text and images; Codestral accepts text; Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct accepts text. Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

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

Which is newer?

Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct is the newest, released Apr 15, 2025. Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B came out Apr 2025; Codestral came out May 29, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B Apr 2025, Codestral 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 Oct 4, 2026.