solar-mini vs Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct
Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct comes out ahead, 58 to 52 on our weighted score, though solar-mini is 45% cheaper per token.
Upstage
solar-mini
52/100- ECI—
- Price$0.15 / $0.15
- Context33K
- Our pick
MetaLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct
58/100- ECI—
- Price$0.197 / $0.51
- Context128K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
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 solar-mini (52). It leads on inputs & features and context window. solar-mini 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 pricesolar-minisolar-mini $0.15 · 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 · solar-mini 32,768 tokens
- Widest inputsLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instructsolar-mini: Text · Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct: Text, Images
- Self-hostingLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-InstructPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | solar-mini | Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 89 | 76 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 25 | 50 |
| Context window | 20% | 0 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 52/100 | 58/100 |
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 | solar-miniUpstage | Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-InstructMeta |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.15 (best) | $0.197 |
| Output | $0.15 (best) | $0.51 |
| Cached input | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.15 (best) | $0.275 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Upstage API | Median of 2 providers |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 32,768 tokens | 128,000 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 4,096 tokens | 4,096 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| API model ID | solar-mini | — |
| API providers | 1 | 2 (best) |
| Released | Jun 12, 2024 | Sep 25, 2024 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Sep 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.
- solar-mini$1.80
- Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct$2.99
Which should you choose?
Which is better: solar-mini or Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct?
Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct is the better all-round choice, scoring 58/100 against solar-mini (52). It leads on inputs & features and context window. solar-mini 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, solar-mini or Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct?
solar-mini is cheaper at $0.15 input / $0.15 output per million tokens (official Upstage API price). 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 $0.15 per million tokens for solar-mini versus $0.275 for Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct (1.8× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. solar-mini has not been scored yet and Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for solar-mini and Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.
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 solar-mini. Maximum output per response: solar-mini up to 4,096, Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct up to 4,096 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
solar-mini accepts text; Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct accepts text and images. Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; solar-mini is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct is the newest, released Sep 25, 2024. solar-mini came out Jun 12, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: solar-mini Sep 2024, 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.
