Model comparison
DBRX vs Qwen3-1.7B
DBRX is the stronger model overall, scoring 29.4 to 26.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. DBRX scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen3-1.7B in 1 category; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where DBRX leads 24.3 to 16.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 32.9% for DBRX and 38% for Qwen3-1.7B.
Side by side
| DBRX | Qwen3-1.7B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Databricks | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 29.4 | 26.6 |
| Released | 2024-03-27 | 2025-04-29 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 21 | 4 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
DBRX: 32.9 (#266), Qwen3-1.7B: —
| Benchmark | DBRX | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1132 | — |
| HumanEval+ | 70.1% | — |
| MBPP+ | 55.8% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
DBRX: —, Qwen3-1.7B: 24.7 (#115)
| Benchmark | DBRX | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 28.4% |
Reasoning DBRX leads
DBRX: 21.4 (#222), Qwen3-1.7B: 19.2 (#267)
| Benchmark | DBRX | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1113 | — |
Math DBRX leads
DBRX: 24.3 (#269), Qwen3-1.7B: 16.3 (#294)
| Benchmark | DBRX | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 8.1% |
| LMArena Math | 1145 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 11.7% | — |
Knowledge Qwen3-1.7B leads
DBRX: 14.9 (#294), Qwen3-1.7B: 19.6 (#278)
| Benchmark | DBRX | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 32.9% | 38% |
| LMArena Expert | 1076 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
DBRX: 29.3 (#268), Qwen3-1.7B: —
| Benchmark | DBRX | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1071 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1068 | — |
| LMArena French | 1096 | — |
| LMArena German | 1057 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 990 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 993 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1078 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1064 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
DBRX: 57.5 (#270), Qwen3-1.7B: —
| Benchmark | DBRX | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1112 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
DBRX: 33.7 (#258), Qwen3-1.7B: —
| Benchmark | DBRX | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1112 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
DBRX: 33.6 (#275), Qwen3-1.7B: —
| Benchmark | DBRX | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1119 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1104 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1111 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is DBRX better than Qwen3-1.7B?
DBRX is the stronger model overall, scoring 29.4 to 26.6 on the Noometry Index.
How many benchmarks do DBRX and Qwen3-1.7B share?
1 benchmark has published results for both models. DBRX has 21 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3-1.7B has 4.