Model comparison

Codellama 70b Instruct vs Qwen3.6 Plus

Qwen3.6 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.5 to 33.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 4 shared benchmarks.

Codellama 70b Instruct Meta

33.7

Rank #237 Confirmed

Qwen3.6 Plus Alibaba (Qwen)

47.5

Rank #62 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. Codellama 70b Instruct scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.6 Plus in 5 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen3.6 Plus leads 62.2 to 33.4.
  • Codellama 70b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Codellama 70b Instruct and Qwen3.6 Plus specifications
Codellama 70b InstructQwen3.6 Plus
ProviderMetaAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index33.747.5
Released—2026-03-31
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window—1M
Max output—66K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.50
Output $ / M tokens—$3
Results tracked737

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.6 Plus leads

Codellama 70b Instruct: 37.6 (#193), Qwen3.6 Plus: 40.8 (#130)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 70b InstructQwen3.6 Plus
SWE-bench Verified—57.9%
LMArena WebDev—1461
SciCode—40.7%
BigCodeBench Instruct40.7%—
LMArena Coding—1467
BigCodeBench Complete49.6%—
ALE-Bench—670.15
HumanEval+65.9%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Codellama 70b Instruct: —, Qwen3.6 Plus: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 70b InstructQwen3.6 Plus
Vending-Bench 2—5,115

Reasoning Qwen3.6 Plus leads

Codellama 70b Instruct: 20.1 (#242), Qwen3.6 Plus: 29.3 (#93)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 70b InstructQwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Hard Prompts10521449
NYT Connections (extended)—60.3%
CritPt—2.9%
Chess Puzzles—17%
Thematic Generalization—59.5%
Mystery Game Puzzles—12%
DTBench—81.9%
LMCA—33.1%
Epoch Capabilities Index—147.65

Math Not comparable

Codellama 70b Instruct: —, Qwen3.6 Plus: 51.8 (#54)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 70b InstructQwen3.6 Plus
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—38.2%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—93.3%
LMArena Math—1450
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—26.2%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—8.3%

Knowledge Not comparable

Codellama 70b Instruct: —, Qwen3.6 Plus: 56.1 (#45)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 70b InstructQwen3.6 Plus
GPQA Diamond—88.4%
SimpleQA Verified—44.1%
LMArena Expert—1454

Multilingual Qwen3.6 Plus leads

Codellama 70b Instruct: 24.8 (#288), Qwen3.6 Plus: 53.3 (#70)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 70b InstructQwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Non-English9921424
LMArena Chinese—1477
LMArena French—1455
LMArena German—1452
LMArena Japanese—1389
LMArena Korean—1379
LMArena Russian—1434
LMArena Spanish—1432

Instruction Following Qwen3.6 Plus leads

Codellama 70b Instruct: 51.9 (#293), Qwen3.6 Plus: 75.0 (#74)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 70b InstructQwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Instruction Following10241425

Long Context Not comparable

Codellama 70b Instruct: —, Qwen3.6 Plus: 45.2 (#49)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 70b InstructQwen3.6 Plus
CL-bench—20.3%
LMArena Longer Query—1439

Writing & Preference Qwen3.6 Plus leads

Codellama 70b Instruct: 33.4 (#277), Qwen3.6 Plus: 62.2 (#82)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 70b InstructQwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text10571437
LMArena Creative Writing—1404
LMArena Multi-Turn—1438

Frequently asked questions

Is Codellama 70b Instruct better than Qwen3.6 Plus?

Qwen3.6 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.5 to 33.7 on the Noometry Index.

Is Codellama 70b Instruct or Qwen3.6 Plus better for coding?

Qwen3.6 Plus scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.8 versus 37.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Codellama 70b Instruct and Qwen3.6 Plus share?

4 benchmarks have published results for both models. Codellama 70b Instruct has 7 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Plus has 37.

Related comparisons

Go deeper