Model comparison

Codellama 34b Instruct vs Qwen3.8 27B

Qwen3.8 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.0 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 10 shared benchmarks.

Codellama 34b Instruct Meta

30.8

Rank #287 Confirmed

Qwen3.8 27B Alibaba (Qwen)

46.0

Rank #68 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. Codellama 34b Instruct scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.8 27B in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen3.8 27B leads 65.8 to 28.2.

Side by side

Codellama 34b Instruct and Qwen3.8 27B specifications
Codellama 34b InstructQwen3.8 27B
ProviderMetaAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index30.846.0
Released—2026-08-14
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—262K
Max output—33K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.99
Output $ / M tokens—$1.49
Results tracked1431

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.8 27B leads

Codellama 34b Instruct: 28.5 (#314), Qwen3.8 27B: 50.5 (#44)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 34b InstructQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Coding10461482
LMArena WebDev—1593
SciCode—46.6%
BigCodeBench Instruct29%—
BigCodeBench Complete37.1%—
HumanEval+43.9%—
MBPP+56.3%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Codellama 34b Instruct: —, Qwen3.8 27B: 32.9 (#57)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 34b InstructQwen3.8 27B
APEX-Agents—47.5%

Reasoning Qwen3.8 27B leads

Codellama 34b Instruct: 19.6 (#255), Qwen3.8 27B: 41.0 (#54)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 34b InstructQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Hard Prompts10321460
ARC-AGI-2—42.4%
NYT Connections (extended)—54.5%
ARC-AGI-1—87.5%
CritPt—5.4%
DTBench—88%
LMCA—41.4%
Surface Evolver Bench—45%
Epoch Capabilities Index—149.38

Math Qwen3.8 27B leads

Codellama 34b Instruct: 31.0 (#230), Qwen3.8 27B: 37.1 (#161)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 34b InstructQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Math10561456
ProofBench—16%

Knowledge Not comparable

Codellama 34b Instruct: —, Qwen3.8 27B: 41.6 (#109)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 34b InstructQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Expert—1482

Multimodal Not comparable

Codellama 34b Instruct: —, Qwen3.8 27B: 41.3 (#37)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 34b InstructQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Vision—1271

Multilingual Qwen3.8 27B leads

Codellama 34b Instruct: 25.8 (#284), Qwen3.8 27B: 53.7 (#60)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 34b InstructQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Non-English10111430
LMArena Chinese9761504
LMArena French—1465
LMArena German—1438
LMArena Japanese—1384
LMArena Korean—1393
LMArena Russian—1415
LMArena Spanish—1448

Instruction Following Qwen3.8 27B leads

Codellama 34b Instruct: 52.2 (#291), Qwen3.8 27B: 75.8 (#53)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 34b InstructQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Instruction Following10281439

Long Context Qwen3.8 27B leads

Codellama 34b Instruct: 30.9 (#284), Qwen3.8 27B: 44.3 (#70)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 34b InstructQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Longer Query10131450

Writing & Preference Qwen3.8 27B leads

Codellama 34b Instruct: 28.2 (#297), Qwen3.8 27B: 65.8 (#43)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 34b InstructQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Text10661441
LMArena Creative Writing10321384
LMArena Multi-Turn10151441
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1671

Frequently asked questions

Is Codellama 34b Instruct better than Qwen3.8 27B?

Qwen3.8 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.0 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.

Is Codellama 34b Instruct or Qwen3.8 27B better for coding?

Qwen3.8 27B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.5 versus 28.5 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Codellama 34b Instruct and Qwen3.8 27B share?

10 benchmarks have published results for both models. Codellama 34b Instruct has 14 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.8 27B has 31.

Related comparisons

Go deeper