Model comparison
Codellama 34b Instruct vs QwQ-32B
QwQ-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.8 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
Meta
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Codellama 34b Instruct scores higher in 0 categories and QwQ-32B in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where QwQ-32B leads 50.6 to 28.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is BigCodeBench Complete: 37.1% for Codellama 34b Instruct and 54.4% for QwQ-32B.
Side by side
| Codellama 34b Instruct | QwQ-32B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 30.8 | 39.8 |
| Released | — | 2024-11-28 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 14 | 36 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding QwQ-32B leads
Codellama 34b Instruct: 28.5 (#314), QwQ-32B: 35.4 (#226)
| Benchmark | Codellama 34b Instruct | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 29% | 44.6% |
| LMArena Coding | 1046 | 1333 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 37.1% | 54.4% |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 20.9% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 72.2% |
| HumanEval+ | 43.9% | — |
| MBPP+ | 56.3% | — |
Reasoning QwQ-32B leads
Codellama 34b Instruct: 19.6 (#255), QwQ-32B: 23.7 (#174)
| Benchmark | Codellama 34b Instruct | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1032 | 1325 |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 5% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 83.5% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 65% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 137.6 |
| ForecastBench | — | 58.3 |
| LiveBench | — | 72% |
Math QwQ-32B leads
Codellama 34b Instruct: 31.0 (#230), QwQ-32B: 38.0 (#143)
| Benchmark | Codellama 34b Instruct | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1056 | 1359 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 59.2% |
| LiveBench Math | — | 77.8% |
Knowledge Not comparable
Codellama 34b Instruct: —, QwQ-32B: 37.2 (#158)
| Benchmark | Codellama 34b Instruct | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 65.3% |
| Confabulations | — | 15.6% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1324 |
Multilingual QwQ-32B leads
Codellama 34b Instruct: 25.8 (#284), QwQ-32B: 44.8 (#176)
| Benchmark | Codellama 34b Instruct | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1011 | 1305 |
| LMArena Chinese | 976 | 1378 |
| LMArena French | — | 1336 |
| LMArena German | — | 1313 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1262 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1279 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1297 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1354 |
Instruction Following QwQ-32B leads
Codellama 34b Instruct: 52.2 (#291), QwQ-32B: 72.6 (#137)
| Benchmark | Codellama 34b Instruct | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1028 | 1297 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 81.8% |
Long Context QwQ-32B leads
Codellama 34b Instruct: 30.9 (#284), QwQ-32B: 49.0 (#11)
| Benchmark | Codellama 34b Instruct | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1013 | 1308 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 83.3% |
Writing & Preference QwQ-32B leads
Codellama 34b Instruct: 28.2 (#297), QwQ-32B: 50.6 (#180)
| Benchmark | Codellama 34b Instruct | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1066 | 1329 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1032 | 1288 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1015 | 1314 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 80.2% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1257 |
| LiveBench Language | — | 51.4% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Codellama 34b Instruct better than QwQ-32B?
QwQ-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.8 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is Codellama 34b Instruct or QwQ-32B better for coding?
QwQ-32B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 35.4 versus 28.5 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Codellama 34b Instruct and QwQ-32B share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Codellama 34b Instruct has 14 scored results on Noometry and QwQ-32B has 36.