Llama 3.2 Instruct 90B (Vision) vs Qwen3 1.7B (Reasoning): A Comparação Definitiva de Desempenho e Preço

Mergulhe profundamente em raciocínio, benchmarks e insights de latência.

O Veredicto Final no Confronto Llama 3.2 Instruct 90B (Vision) vs Qwen3 1.7B (Reasoning)

Após uma análise abrangente, Llama 3.2 Instruct 90B (Vision) surge como a escolha superior para usuários que priorizam inteligência e raciocínio brutos. No entanto, Qwen3 1.7B (Reasoning) continua a ser uma opção altamente competitiva, especialmente para cenários que exigem tempos de resposta mais rápidos e eficiência de custos. Esta detalhada comparação de Llama 3.2 Instruct 90B (Vision) vs Qwen3 1.7B (Reasoning) irá analisar cada métrica crítica para ajudá-lo a tomar a melhor decisão.

Explore os melhores cenários•Deixe o AI Selector recomendar os próximos passos

Instantâneo do Modelo

Principais métricas de decisão em um relance.

Llama 3.2 Instruct 90B (Vision)

Overall Capabilities

The capability radar provides a holistic view of the Llama 3.2 Instruct 90B (Vision) vs Qwen3 1.7B (Reasoning) matchup. This chart illustrates each model's strengths and weaknesses at a glance, forming a cornerstone of our Llama 3.2 Instruct 90B (Vision) vs Qwen3 1.7B (Reasoning) analysis.

This radar chart visually maps the core capabilities (reasoning, coding, math proxy, multimodal, long context) of `Llama 3.2 Instruct 90B (Vision)` vs `Qwen3 1.7B (Reasoning)`.

Benchmark Breakdown

For a granular look, this chart directly compares scores across standardized benchmarks. In the critical MMLU Pro test, a key part of the Llama 3.2 Instruct 90B (Vision) vs Qwen3 1.7B (Reasoning) debate, Llama 3.2 Instruct 90B (Vision) scores 60 against Qwen3 1.7B (Reasoning)'s 40. This data-driven approach is essential for any serious Llama 3.2 Instruct 90B (Vision) vs Qwen3 1.7B (Reasoning) comparison.

This grouped bar chart provides a side-by-side comparison for each benchmark metric.

Speed & Latency

Speed is a crucial factor in the Llama 3.2 Instruct 90B (Vision) vs Qwen3 1.7B (Reasoning) decision for interactive applications. The metrics below highlight the trade-offs you should weigh before shipping to production.

Time to First Token

Llama 3.2 Instruct 90B (Vision)300ms

Qwen3 1.7B (Reasoning)300ms

Tokens per Second

Llama 3.2 Instruct 90B (Vision)35.236

Qwen3 1.7B (Reasoning)126.397

Head to the playground to validate these results yourself

The Economics of Llama 3.2 Instruct 90B (Vision) vs Qwen3 1.7B (Reasoning)

Power is only one part of the equation. This Llama 3.2 Instruct 90B (Vision) vs Qwen3 1.7B (Reasoning) pricing analysis gives you a true sense of value.

Pricing Breakdown

Compare input and output pricing at a glance.

Real-World Cost Scenario

To process 1M input tokens and generate 250k output tokens, Llama 3.2 Instruct 90B (Vision) would cost $0.001, whereas Qwen3 1.7B (Reasoning) would cost $0.000. This practical calculation is vital for any developer considering the Llama 3.2 Instruct 90B (Vision) vs Qwen3 1.7B (Reasoning) choice.

Review the complete pricing and packaging strategy

Which Model Wins the Llama 3.2 Instruct 90B (Vision) vs Qwen3 1.7B (Reasoning) Battle for You?

Choose Llama 3.2 Instruct 90B (Vision) if...

You are working in a technical or scientific field requiring the highest accuracy.

You need the most advanced reasoning capabilities available.

Your use case demands cutting-edge AI performance.

Choose Qwen3 1.7B (Reasoning) if...

You are developing at scale where operational costs are critical.

You prioritize cost-effectiveness over maximum performance.

Your workload requires consistent, reliable performance.

Explore all Best picks Use the AI Selector for a tailored recommendation

Your Questions about the Llama 3.2 Instruct 90B (Vision) vs Qwen3 1.7B (Reasoning) Comparison

Review the full evaluation methodology · Read the latest analysis posts

Fonte de dados: https://artificialanalysis.ai/