Model comparison
Claude 2.1 vs Codellama 34b Instruct
Codellama 34b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.8 to 25.2 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
MetaSummary
- The widest gap is in math, where Codellama 34b Instruct leads 31.0 to 10.2.
- Codellama 34b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude 2.1 | Codellama 34b Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 25.2 | 30.8 |
| Released | 2023-11-21 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 7 | 14 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Codellama 34b Instruct leads
Claude 2.1: 26.2 (#327), Codellama 34b Instruct: 28.5 (#314)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Codellama 34b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 7.1% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 29% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1046 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 37.1% |
| HumanEval+ | — | 43.9% |
| MBPP+ | — | 56.3% |
Reasoning Claude 2.1 leads
Claude 2.1: 21.4 (#221), Codellama 34b Instruct: 19.6 (#255)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Codellama 34b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1032 |
| DTBench | 51% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 119.27 | — |
| ForecastBench | 54.2 | — |
Math Codellama 34b Instruct leads
Claude 2.1: 10.2 (#315), Codellama 34b Instruct: 31.0 (#230)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Codellama 34b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 1.9% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1056 |
Knowledge Not comparable
Claude 2.1: 15.4 (#292), Codellama 34b Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Codellama 34b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 33% | — |
| MMLU | 73.5% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Claude 2.1: —, Codellama 34b Instruct: 25.8 (#284)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Codellama 34b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1011 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 976 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Claude 2.1: —, Codellama 34b Instruct: 52.2 (#291)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Codellama 34b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1028 |
Long Context Not comparable
Claude 2.1: —, Codellama 34b Instruct: 30.9 (#284)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Codellama 34b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1013 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Claude 2.1: —, Codellama 34b Instruct: 28.2 (#297)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Codellama 34b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1066 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1032 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1015 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude 2.1 better than Codellama 34b Instruct?
Codellama 34b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.8 to 25.2 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude 2.1 or Codellama 34b Instruct better for coding?
Codellama 34b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 28.5 versus 26.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Claude 2.1 and Codellama 34b Instruct share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 2.1 has 7 scored results on Noometry and Codellama 34b Instruct has 14.