Pairwise benchmark snapshot · Aug 1, 2026

Llama 3.1 70B vs Qwen 2.5 Plus benchmark

Name: Llama 3.1 70B vs Qwen 2.5 Plus AI benchmark comparison
Creator: CompareLLM
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

In this head-to-head showdown, Qwen 2.5 Plus delivers higher overall intelligence and human-preferred responses (Elo 1,445 vs 1,240), while Qwen 2.5 Plus leads in SWE-bench software engineering benchmarks (59.2%), while Llama 3.1 70B is more budget-friendly at $0.4/1M per 1M output tokens. Review the complete breakdown below to determine which model best fits your performance and budget requirements.

Share Analysis:

Verified Head-to-Head Advantage Breakdown

8 direct benchmark disciplines evaluated across capability, speed, and cost

Llama 3.1 70B (3)Qwen 2.5 Plus (5)

Llama 3.1 70B

3 of 8 Wins

✓Time to first token✓Output speed✓Output price

Qwen 2.5 Plus

5 of 8 Wins

✓Preference Elo✓LiveBench✓SWE-bench✓GPQA Diamond✓Input price

Qwen 2.5 Plus

Δ 205 Arena Elo pts

Throughput LeaderLlama 3.1 70B Wins

Llama 3.1 70B

125 tok/s

Value per Dollar LeaderLlama 3.1 70B Wins

Llama 3.1 70B

$0.4 / 1M output

Capability Percentiles

Relative percentile scores computed across all active models in the benchmark catalog.

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Leaders Matchup Capability Radar

Comparing top Western standard models with China's leading frontier rival across 6 skill dimensions. Tap any spoke or dot to inspect.

Tap any node to inspect

Percentile 0–100

Head-to-Head Comparison

Overall Matchup Breakdown

Category wins across reasoning intelligence, generation speed, and token cost.

Llama 3.1 70B (3)vsQwen 2.5 Plus (6)

Llama 3.1 70B: 3W (33%)Overall: Qwen 2.5 PlusQwen 2.5 Plus: 6W (67%)

← Llama 3.1 70B1 tiesQwen 2.5 Plus →

🏆Qwen 2.5 Plus(5/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy

Benchmark

Llama 3.1 70BvsQwen 2.5 Plus

Preference Elo

1,240vs1,445+205

Coding Elo

—vs1,460

SWE-bench

40.2%vs59.2%+19%

LiveBench

46.8%vs63.5%+16.7%

GPQA Diamond

48%vs75.8%+27.8%

Llama 3.1 70B: 0WQwen 2.5 Plus: 5W

🏆Llama 3.1 70B(2/2)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Benchmark

Llama 3.1 70BvsQwen 2.5 Plus

Output speed

125 tok/svs110 tok/s+15 tok/s

Time to first token

170 msvs180 ms+10 ms

Llama 3.1 70B: 2WQwen 2.5 Plus: 0W

Tied (1-1)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Benchmark

Llama 3.1 70BvsQwen 2.5 Plus

Output price

$0.4/1Mvs$1/1M+$0.6/1M

Input price

$0.35/1Mvs$0.25/1M+$0.1/1M

Context window

128kvs128k

Llama 3.1 70B: 1WQwen 2.5 Plus: 1W

Side-by-Side Benchmark Matrix

Preference Elo+205

Llama 3.1 70B1,240

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

Qwen 2.5 Plus1,445

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

Coding Elo

Llama 3.1 70B—

Qwen 2.5 Plus1,460

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

LiveBench+16.7%

Llama 3.1 70B46.8%

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

Qwen 2.5 Plus63.5%

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

SWE-bench+19%

Llama 3.1 70B40.2%

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

Qwen 2.5 Plus59.2%

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

GPQA Diamond+27.8%

Llama 3.1 70B48%

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

Qwen 2.5 Plus75.8%

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

Time to first token+10 ms

Llama 3.1 70B170 ms

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

Qwen 2.5 Plus180 ms

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

Output speed+15 tok/s

Llama 3.1 70B125 tok/s

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

Qwen 2.5 Plus110 tok/s

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

Input price+$0.1/1M

Llama 3.1 70B$0.35/1M

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

Qwen 2.5 Plus$0.25/1M

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

Output price+$0.6/1M

Llama 3.1 70B$0.4/1M

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

Qwen 2.5 Plus$1/1M

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

Context window

Llama 3.1 70B128k

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

Qwen 2.5 Plus128k

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

Benchmark	Llama 3.1 70B	Qwen 2.5 Plus	Advantage Delta
Preference Elo	1,240 seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026	1,445 seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026	+205
Coding Elo	—	1,460 seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026	—
LiveBench	46.8% seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026	63.5% seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026	+16.7%
SWE-bench	40.2% seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026	59.2% seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026	+19%
GPQA Diamond	48% seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026	75.8% seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026	+27.8%
Time to first token	170 ms seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026	180 ms seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026	+10 ms
Output speed	125 tok/s seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026	110 tok/s seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026	+15 tok/s
Input price	$0.35/1M seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026	$0.25/1M seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026	+$0.1/1M
Output price	$0.4/1M seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026	$1/1M seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026	+$0.6/1M
Context window	128k seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026	128k seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026	—

Interactive Simulator (USD)

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Simulate monthly production API costs in USD (US Dollar).

Save up to 23% with Llama 3.1 70B

Monthly Volume50M tokens/mo

Quick Presets:

Token Ratio (In vs Out)70% In / 30% Out

RAG / Search (10% out)Coding / Chat (50% out)

Llama 3.1 70B$18.25 / mo

In: $12.25Out: $6

Qwen 2.5 Plus$23.75 / mo

In: $8.75Out: $15

Estimated Cost Delta

Llama 3.1 70B is estimated to save $5.50/month ($66/year).

Based on 50M tokens (30% gen)

Key Selection Recommendations

1
Qwen 2.5 Plus:Pick Qwen 2.5 Plus when repo-level coding accuracy is the constraint.
2
Llama 3.1 70B:Pick Llama 3.1 70B when you are optimizing output cost.
3
Llama 3.1 70B:Pick Llama 3.1 70B when time-to-first-token matters more than peak Elo.

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsQwen 2.5 Plus

Higher SWE-bench (59.2%).

High-volume chatLlama 3.1 70B

Lower output list price ($0.4/1M).

Voice / low-latency UILlama 3.1 70B

Lower TTFT (170 ms).

Long-document RAGLlama 3.1 70B

Larger window (128k).

Screenshots / visionQwen 2.5 Plus

Qwen 2.5 Plus is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Target Workload	Recommended Pick	Evaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agents	Qwen 2.5 Plus	Higher SWE-bench (59.2%).
High-volume chat	Llama 3.1 70B	Lower output list price ($0.4/1M).
Voice / low-latency UI	Llama 3.1 70B	Lower TTFT (170 ms).
Long-document RAG	Llama 3.1 70B	Larger window (128k).
Screenshots / vision	Qwen 2.5 Plus	Qwen 2.5 Plus is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Community Sentiment

Cast Your Matchup Vote

0 total votes

Community Discussions (0)

No comments posted on this matchup yet. Be the first to share an evaluation note!

Social Share Card Preview

Dynamic OpenGraph banner generated at /compare/llama-3-1-70b-vs-qwen-2-5-plus/opengraph-image

Save PNG

CompareLLM AI Matrix

Verified Head-to-Head Telemetry

LIVE BENCHMARK

Llama 3.1 70B

Elo 1,240

SWE-bench40.2%

Speed (tok/s)125 tok/s

Input / 1M Tokens$0.35/1M

Output / 1M Tokens$0.4/1M

Alibaba

Qwen 2.5 Plus

Elo 1,445

SWE-bench59.2%

Speed (tok/s)110 tok/s

Input / 1M Tokens$0.25/1M

Output / 1M Tokens$1/1M

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, Llama 3.1 70B or Qwen 2.5 Plus?: Qwen 2.5 Plus has the higher preference Elo in our latest snapshot (1,445). “Better” still depends on coding, price, and latency — see the table.
Which is better at coding, Llama 3.1 70B or Qwen 2.5 Plus?: Qwen 2.5 Plus leads SWE-bench at 59.2% vs 40.2%. SWE-bench is one harness, not your repo.
Which is cheaper to run in production?: Llama 3.1 70B output tokens are $0.4/1M versus $1/1M. Input prices and retry rates still move the real bill.
Which is faster, Llama 3.1 70B or Qwen 2.5 Plus?: Llama 3.1 70B has the lower time-to-first-token (170 ms vs 180 ms). Tokens/sec is a separate column if you care about long completions.
Which has the larger context window?: Llama 3.1 70B accepts 128k tokens versus 128k.
Can I self-host either model?: Llama 3.1 70B is marked open-weights in our catalog. The other side is a closed API. Check the provider license before you ship weights.
Are these scores from CompareLLM’s own evals?: No. V1 aggregates public leaderboards (and optional first-party latency pings). Each cell names its source and date. Read /methodology.
What does preference Elo mean on this page?: Preference Elo is a crowd vote from LMArena / Arena. People see two hidden answers and pick the one they like more. The model that wins more often gets a higher Elo. That means people preferred it — not that it passed a school test. It is not SWE-bench, not accuracy, and not a number we invent. Llama 3.1 70B and Qwen 2.5 Plus Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons

All Llama 3.1 70B matchups →|All Qwen 2.5 Plus matchups →

Llama 3.1 70B vs Llama 3.1 405B (previous llama)Llama 3.1 70B vs Llama 3.3 70B (next llama)Qwen 2.5 Plus vs Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B (next qwen)Qwen 3 Max vs Qwen 2.5 Plus Llama 4 Maverick vs Qwen 2.5 Plus Qwen QwQ 32B vs Qwen 2.5 Plus

Llama 3.1 70B vs Qwen 2.5 Plus benchmark

Capability Percentiles

Relative percentile scores computed across all active models in the benchmark catalog.

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Leaders Matchup Capability Radar

Comparing top Western standard models with China's leading frontier rival across 6 skill dimensions. Tap any spoke or dot to inspect.

Tap any node to inspect

Percentile 0–100

Benchmark

Llama 3.1 70B

Qwen 2.5 Plus

Advantage Delta

Preference Elo

1,240

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

1,445

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

+205

Coding Elo

—

1,460

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

—

LiveBench

46.8%

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

63.5%

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

+16.7%

SWE-bench

40.2%

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

59.2%

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

+19%

GPQA Diamond

48%

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

75.8%

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

+27.8%

Time to first token

170 ms

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

180 ms

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

+10 ms

Output speed

125 tok/s

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

110 tok/s

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

+15 tok/s

Input price

$0.35/1M

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

$0.25/1M

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

+$0.1/1M

Output price

$0.4/1M

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

$1/1M

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

+$0.6/1M

Context window

128k

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

128k

seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026

—

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsQwen 2.5 Plus

Higher SWE-bench (59.2%).

High-volume chatLlama 3.1 70B

Lower output list price ($0.4/1M).

Voice / low-latency UILlama 3.1 70B

Lower TTFT (170 ms).

Long-document RAGLlama 3.1 70B

Larger window (128k).

Screenshots / visionQwen 2.5 Plus

Qwen 2.5 Plus is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Target Workload	Recommended Pick	Evaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agents	Qwen 2.5 Plus	Higher SWE-bench (59.2%).
High-volume chat	Llama 3.1 70B	Lower output list price ($0.4/1M).
Voice / low-latency UI	Llama 3.1 70B	Lower TTFT (170 ms).
Long-document RAG	Llama 3.1 70B	Larger window (128k).
Screenshots / vision	Qwen 2.5 Plus	Qwen 2.5 Plus is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, Llama 3.1 70B or Qwen 2.5 Plus?

Qwen 2.5 Plus has the higher preference Elo in our latest snapshot (1,445). “Better” still depends on coding, price, and latency — see the table.

Which is better at coding, Llama 3.1 70B or Qwen 2.5 Plus?

Qwen 2.5 Plus leads SWE-bench at 59.2% vs 40.2%. SWE-bench is one harness, not your repo.

Which is cheaper to run in production?

Llama 3.1 70B output tokens are $0.4/1M versus $1/1M. Input prices and retry rates still move the real bill.

Which is faster, Llama 3.1 70B or Qwen 2.5 Plus?

Llama 3.1 70B has the lower time-to-first-token (170 ms vs 180 ms). Tokens/sec is a separate column if you care about long completions.

Which has the larger context window?

Llama 3.1 70B accepts 128k tokens versus 128k.

Can I self-host either model?

Llama 3.1 70B is marked open-weights in our catalog. The other side is a closed API. Check the provider license before you ship weights.

Are these scores from CompareLLM’s own evals?

No. V1 aggregates public leaderboards (and optional first-party latency pings). Each cell names its source and date. Read /methodology.

What does preference Elo mean on this page?

Preference Elo is a crowd vote from LMArena / Arena. People see two hidden answers and pick the one they like more. The model that wins more often gets a higher Elo. That means people preferred it — not that it passed a school test. It is not SWE-bench, not accuracy, and not a number we invent. Llama 3.1 70B and Qwen 2.5 Plus Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.