Noometry

Model comparison

Codellama 34b Instruct vs Qwen3.7 Max

Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 10 shared benchmarks.

Codellama 34b Instruct Meta

30.8

Rank #287 Confirmed

Qwen3.7 Max Alibaba (Qwen)

51.5

Rank #42 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. Codellama 34b Instruct scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.7 Max in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen3.7 Max leads 65.0 to 28.2.
  • Codellama 34b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Codellama 34b InstructQwen3.7 Max
ProviderMetaAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index30.851.5
Released—2026-05-19
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window—1M
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$2.50
Output $ / M tokens—$7.50
Results tracked1433

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.7 Max leads

Codellama 34b Instruct: 28.5 (#314), Qwen3.7 Max: 50.4 (#45)

BenchmarkCodellama 34b InstructQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Coding10461498
SWE-bench Verified—77.3%
LMArena WebDev—1515
SciCode—48.8%
BigCodeBench Instruct29%—
BigCodeBench Complete37.1%—
ALE-Bench—1,189
HumanEval+43.9%—
MBPP+56.3%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Codellama 34b Instruct: —, Qwen3.7 Max: 22.1 (#135)

BenchmarkCodellama 34b InstructQwen3.7 Max
GBAEval—0.4%

Reasoning Qwen3.7 Max leads

Codellama 34b Instruct: 19.6 (#255), Qwen3.7 Max: 49.2 (#38)

BenchmarkCodellama 34b InstructQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Hard Prompts10321483
SimpleBench—70.4%
NYT Connections (extended)—85.1%
CritPt—13.4%
Chess Puzzles—19%
EBR-Bench—9.5%
Mystery Game Puzzles—32%
DTBench—92.3%
LMCA—44%
Epoch Capabilities Index—153.68

Math Qwen3.7 Max leads

Codellama 34b Instruct: 31.0 (#230), Qwen3.7 Max: 62.4 (#32)

BenchmarkCodellama 34b InstructQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Math10561490
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—64.6%
FrontierMath Tier 4—34.1%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—95.6%
ProofBench—26%

Knowledge Not comparable

Codellama 34b Instruct: —, Qwen3.7 Max: 61.6 (#28)

BenchmarkCodellama 34b InstructQwen3.7 Max
GPQA Diamond—90.9%
SimpleQA Verified—55.8%
LMArena Expert—1488

Multilingual Qwen3.7 Max leads

Codellama 34b Instruct: 25.8 (#284), Qwen3.7 Max: 56.9 (#15)

BenchmarkCodellama 34b InstructQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Non-English10111474
LMArena Chinese9761530
LMArena Russian—1484

Instruction Following Qwen3.7 Max leads

Codellama 34b Instruct: 52.2 (#291), Qwen3.7 Max: 76.7 (#38)

BenchmarkCodellama 34b InstructQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Instruction Following10281460

Long Context Qwen3.7 Max leads

Codellama 34b Instruct: 30.9 (#284), Qwen3.7 Max: 45.4 (#40)

BenchmarkCodellama 34b InstructQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Longer Query10131482

Writing & Preference Qwen3.7 Max leads

Codellama 34b Instruct: 28.2 (#297), Qwen3.7 Max: 65.0 (#54)

BenchmarkCodellama 34b InstructQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Text10661476
LMArena Creative Writing10321449
LMArena Multi-Turn10151481
EQ-Bench 4—1110

Frequently asked questions

Is Codellama 34b Instruct better than Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.

Is Codellama 34b Instruct or Qwen3.7 Max better for coding?

Qwen3.7 Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.4 versus 28.5 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Codellama 34b Instruct and Qwen3.7 Max share?

10 benchmarks have published results for both models. Codellama 34b Instruct has 14 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Max has 33.

Related comparisons

Go deeper