Llama 4 Scout vs Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

Llama 4 Scout leads the LLM Stats Score 7.8 to 2.0. Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct is 1.5x cheaper per token.

Meta · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Llama 4 Scout leads the overall LLM Stats Score 7.8 to 2.0, ranking #282 overall.

In the 5 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Llama 4 Scout wins 3; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

On price, Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct is roughly 1.5x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Llama 4 Scout also accepts a larger context window (10,000,000 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Llama 4 Scout

overall performance matters — it scores 7.8 and ranks #282 on LLM Stats
you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 3 of 5 exact shared results
you process long inputs — it offers a 10,000,000 token context window
you want the most recent training data — it shipped Apr 2025

Choose Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

cost matters — it's about 1.5x cheaper per token

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Better token value: Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

Llama 4 Scout

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

3 shared

Index

Llama 4 Scout

Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

Math

12.8#232 · 5 evals

4.9#276 · 6 evals

Finance

10.2#143 · 2 evals

1.2#190 · 4 evals

Legal

10.2#127 · 2 evals

-0.4#185 · 3 evals

Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

12 reported for Llama 4 Scout · 15 for Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

5 shared

Llama 4 Scout outperforms in 3 benchmarks (LiveCodeBench, MMLU, MMLU-Pro), while Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct is better at 2 benchmarks (MATH, MBPP).

Llama 4 Scout has a slight edge in benchmark performance.

Mon Sep 14 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct costs less

For input processing, Llama 4 Scout ($0.08/1M tokens) is 1.1x cheaper than Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct ($0.09/1M tokens).

For output processing, Llama 4 Scout ($0.30/1M tokens) is 3.3x more expensive than Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct ($0.09/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Llama 4 Scout is more expensive than Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers

Mon Sep 14 2026 • llm-stats.com

Llama 4 Scout

Input tokens$0.08

Output tokens$0.30

Best providerDeepinfra

Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

Input tokens$0.09

Output tokens$0.09

Best providerLambda

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

77.0B diff

Llama 4 Scout has 77.0B more parameters than Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct, making it 240.6% larger.

Llama 4 Scout

109.0Bparameters

Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

32.0Bparameters

109.0B

Llama 4 Scout

32.0B

Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Llama 4 Scout accepts 10,000,000 input tokens compared to Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct's 128,000 tokens. Llama 4 Scout can generate longer responses up to 10,000,000 tokens, while Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct is limited to 128,000 tokens.

Llama 4 Scout

Input10,000,000 tokens

Output10,000,000 tokens

Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

Input128,000 tokens

Output128,000 tokens

Mon Sep 14 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Llama 4 Scout supports multimodal inputs, whereas Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct does not.

Llama 4 Scout can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Llama 4 Scout

Text

Images

Audio

Video

Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

Text

Images

Audio

Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Llama 4 Scout is licensed under Llama 4 Community License Agreement, while Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct uses Apache 2.0.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Llama 4 Scout

Llama 4 Community License Agreement

Open weights

Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Llama 4 Scout was released on 2025-04-05, while Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct was released on 2024-09-19.

Llama 4 Scout is 7 months newer than Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct.

Llama 4 Scout

Apr 5, 2025

1.4 years ago

6mo newer

Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

Sep 19, 2024

2.0 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Provider Availability

Llama 4 Scout is available from DeepInfra, Lambda, Novita, Groq, Fireworks, Together. Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct is available from Lambda, DeepInfra, Hyperbolic, Fireworks.

Llama 4 Scout

Deepinfra

Input Price:Input: $0.08/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.30/1M

Lambda

Input Price:Input: $0.08/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.30/1M

Novita

Input Price:Input: $0.10/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.50/1M

Groq

Input Price:Input: $0.11/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.34/1M

Fireworks

Input Price:Input: $0.15/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.60/1M

Together

Input Price:Input: $0.18/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.59/1M

Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

Lambda

Input Price:Input: $0.09/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.09/1M

Deepinfra

Input Price:Input: $0.18/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.18/1M

Hyperbolic

Input Price:Input: $0.20/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.20/1M

Fireworks

Input Price:Input: $0.89/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.89/1M

* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Llama 4 Scout and Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Llama 4 Scout

✓ Preferred

Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Llama 4 Scout vs Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct.

Which is better, Llama 4 Scout or Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct?

Llama 4 Scout leads the LLM Stats Score 7.8 to 2.0. Llama 4 Scout is made by Meta and Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Llama 4 Scout compare to Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct in benchmarks?

Llama 4 Scout scores DocVQA: 94.4%, MGSM: 90.6%, ChartQA: 88.8%, MMLU: 79.6%, MMLU-Pro: 74.3%. Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct scores HumanEval: 92.7%, GSM8k: 91.1%, MBPP: 90.2%, HellaSwag: 83.0%, Winogrande: 80.8%.

Is Llama 4 Scout cheaper than Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct?

Llama 4 Scout is 1.1x cheaper for input tokens. Llama 4 Scout costs $0.08/M input and $0.30/M output via deepinfra. Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct costs $0.09/M input and $0.09/M output via lambda.

What are the context window sizes for Llama 4 Scout and Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct?

Llama 4 Scout supports 10.0M tokens and Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct supports 128K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Llama 4 Scout and Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (7.8 vs 2.0), context window (10.0M vs 128K), input pricing ($0.08 vs $0.09/M), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Llama 4 Community License Agreement vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Llama 4 Scout and Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct?

Llama 4 Scout is developed by Meta and Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.

Llama 4 Scout vs Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

Which is better?

Choose Llama 4 Scout

Choose Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

At a glance

Capability indexes

Individual benchmarks

Human preference

Pricing Analysis

Model Size

Context Window

Input capabilities

Llama 4 Scout

Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

License

Release Timeline

Knowledge Cutoff

Provider Availability

Llama 4 Scout

Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

Outputs Comparison

Judge for yourself.

FAQ

Which is better, Llama 4 Scout or Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct?

How does Llama 4 Scout compare to Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct in benchmarks?

Is Llama 4 Scout cheaper than Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct?

What are the context window sizes for Llama 4 Scout and Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct?

What are the main differences between Llama 4 Scout and Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct?

Who makes Llama 4 Scout and Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct?

More Llama 4 Scout comparisons

More Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct comparisons

Llama 4 Scout vs Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

Which is better?

Choose Llama 4 Scout

Choose Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

At a glance

Capability indexes

Individual benchmarks

Human preference

Pricing Analysis

Model Size

Context Window

Input capabilities

Llama 4 Scout

Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

License

Release Timeline

Knowledge Cutoff

Provider Availability

Llama 4 Scout

Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

Outputs Comparison

Judge for yourself.

Which is better, Llama 4 Scout or Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct?

How does Llama 4 Scout compare to Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct in benchmarks?

Is Llama 4 Scout cheaper than Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct?

What are the context window sizes for Llama 4 Scout and Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct?

What are the main differences between Llama 4 Scout and Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct?

Who makes Llama 4 Scout and Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct?

Related comparisons

More Llama 4 Scout comparisons

More Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct comparisons