Noometry

Model comparison

Codellama 34b Instruct vs Qwen3.5-Flash

Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.5 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 10 shared benchmarks.

Codellama 34b Instruct Meta

30.8

Rank #287 Confirmed

Qwen3.5-Flash Alibaba (Qwen)

42.5

Rank #112 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. Codellama 34b Instruct scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.5-Flash in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen3.5-Flash leads 57.9 to 28.2.
  • Codellama 34b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Codellama 34b InstructQwen3.5-Flash
ProviderMetaAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index30.842.5
Released—2026-02-23
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window—1M
Max output—66K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.10
Output $ / M tokens—$0.40
Results tracked1432

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Codellama 34b Instruct: 28.5 (#314), Qwen3.5-Flash: 34.2 (#242)

BenchmarkCodellama 34b InstructQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Coding10461412
LMArena WebDev—1244
BigCodeBench Instruct29%—
BigCodeBench Complete37.1%—
ALE-Bench—221.8
HumanEval+43.9%—
MBPP+56.3%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Codellama 34b Instruct: —, Qwen3.5-Flash: —

BenchmarkCodellama 34b InstructQwen3.5-Flash
Vending-Bench 2—462.69

Reasoning Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Codellama 34b Instruct: 19.6 (#255), Qwen3.5-Flash: 33.7 (#72)

BenchmarkCodellama 34b InstructQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Hard Prompts10321403
Chess Puzzles—21%
Mystery Game Puzzles—20%
DTBench—82.9%
LMCA—29.1%
Epoch Capabilities Index—143.98

Math Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Codellama 34b Instruct: 31.0 (#230), Qwen3.5-Flash: 37.4 (#158)

BenchmarkCodellama 34b InstructQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Math10561407
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—18.2%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—84.4%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—6.2%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—0%

Knowledge Not comparable

Codellama 34b Instruct: —, Qwen3.5-Flash: 43.2 (#93)

BenchmarkCodellama 34b InstructQwen3.5-Flash
GPQA Diamond—82.3%
SimpleQA Verified—20.3%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—10.5%
LMArena Expert—1407

Multilingual Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Codellama 34b Instruct: 25.8 (#284), Qwen3.5-Flash: 50.5 (#121)

BenchmarkCodellama 34b InstructQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Non-English10111385
LMArena Chinese9761446
LMArena French—1412
LMArena German—1390
LMArena Japanese—1368
LMArena Korean—1344
LMArena Russian—1379
LMArena Spanish—1400

Instruction Following Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Codellama 34b Instruct: 52.2 (#291), Qwen3.5-Flash: 72.6 (#139)

BenchmarkCodellama 34b InstructQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Instruction Following10281374

Long Context Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Codellama 34b Instruct: 30.9 (#284), Qwen3.5-Flash: 42.4 (#124)

BenchmarkCodellama 34b InstructQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Longer Query10131392

Writing & Preference Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Codellama 34b Instruct: 28.2 (#297), Qwen3.5-Flash: 57.9 (#122)

BenchmarkCodellama 34b InstructQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text10661397
LMArena Creative Writing10321343
LMArena Multi-Turn10151393

Frequently asked questions

Is Codellama 34b Instruct better than Qwen3.5-Flash?

Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.5 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.

Is Codellama 34b Instruct or Qwen3.5-Flash better for coding?

Qwen3.5-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.2 versus 28.5 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Codellama 34b Instruct and Qwen3.5-Flash share?

10 benchmarks have published results for both models. Codellama 34b Instruct has 14 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5-Flash has 32.

Related comparisons

Go deeper