Llama 65B vs Qwen3 1.7B (Non-reasoning): A Comparação Definitiva de Desempenho e Preço

Mergulhe profundamente em raciocínio, benchmarks e insights de latência.

O Veredicto Final no Confronto Llama 65B vs Qwen3 1.7B (Non-reasoning)

Após uma análise abrangente, Llama 65B surge como a escolha superior para usuários que priorizam inteligência e raciocínio brutos. No entanto, Qwen3 1.7B (Non-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 65B vs Qwen3 1.7B (Non-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 65B

Overall Capabilities

The capability radar provides a holistic view of the Llama 65B vs Qwen3 1.7B (Non-reasoning) matchup. This chart illustrates each model's strengths and weaknesses at a glance, forming a cornerstone of our Llama 65B vs Qwen3 1.7B (Non-reasoning) analysis.

This radar chart visually maps the core capabilities (reasoning, coding, math proxy, multimodal, long context) of `Llama 65B` vs `Qwen3 1.7B (Non-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 65B vs Qwen3 1.7B (Non-reasoning) debate, Llama 65B scores 60 against Qwen3 1.7B (Non-reasoning)'s 10. This data-driven approach is essential for any serious Llama 65B vs Qwen3 1.7B (Non-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 65B vs Qwen3 1.7B (Non-reasoning) decision for interactive applications. The metrics below highlight the trade-offs you should weigh before shipping to production.

Time to First Token

Llama 65B300ms

Qwen3 1.7B (Non-reasoning)300ms

Tokens per Second

Llama 65B54

Qwen3 1.7B (Non-reasoning)113.098

Head to the playground to validate these results yourself

The Economics of Llama 65B vs Qwen3 1.7B (Non-reasoning)

Power is only one part of the equation. This Llama 65B vs Qwen3 1.7B (Non-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 65B would cost $0.018, whereas Qwen3 1.7B (Non-reasoning) would cost $0.000. This practical calculation is vital for any developer considering the Llama 65B vs Qwen3 1.7B (Non-reasoning) choice.

Review the complete pricing and packaging strategy

Which Model Wins the Llama 65B vs Qwen3 1.7B (Non-reasoning) Battle for You?

Choose Llama 65B if...

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

Cost is a secondary concern to power in your Llama 65B vs Qwen3 1.7B (Non-reasoning) decision.

You need the most advanced reasoning capabilities available.

Choose Qwen3 1.7B (Non-reasoning) if...

You need a highly responsive model for user-facing applications.

Your budget is a primary consideration in the Llama 65B vs Qwen3 1.7B (Non-reasoning) choice.

You are developing at scale where operational costs are critical.

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

Your Questions about the Llama 65B vs Qwen3 1.7B (Non-reasoning) Comparison

Review the full evaluation methodology · Read the latest analysis posts

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