Model comparison

Dolly 2.0-12b vs Qwen2.5-Coder-32B

Qwen2.5-Coder-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.9 to 24.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.

Dolly 2.0-12b Databricks

24.9

Rank #339 Confirmed

Qwen2.5-Coder-32B Alibaba (Qwen)

32.9

Rank #239 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. Dolly 2.0-12b scores higher in 1 category and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B in 5 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads 41.8 to 15.3.

Side by side

Dolly 2.0-12b and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B specifications
Dolly 2.0-12bQwen2.5-Coder-32B
ProviderDatabricksAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index24.932.9
Released2023-04-112024-09-18
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—33K
Max output—29K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.66
Output $ / M tokens—$1
Results tracked1731

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

Category by category

Coding Too close to call

Dolly 2.0-12b: 23.0 (#327), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 22.4 (#328)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkDolly 2.0-12bQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Coding7761276
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)—9%
Aider Polyglot—16.4%
BigCodeBench Instruct—49%
LiveBench Coding—56.9%
BigCodeBench Complete—58%
HumanEval+—87.2%
MBPP+—77%

Reasoning Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads

Dolly 2.0-12b: 14.6 (#315), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 20.4 (#220)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkDolly 2.0-12bQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Hard Prompts8041251
Epoch Capabilities Index88.94119.41
HellaSwag70.8%83%
WinoGrande61.8%80.8%
LiveBench Reasoning—42.1%
LiveBench Data Analysis—49.9%
LiveBench—46.2%
PIQA75.4%—

Math Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads

Dolly 2.0-12b: 25.0 (#250), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 30.8 (#203)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkDolly 2.0-12bQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Math8711251
LiveBench Math—46.6%
GSM8K—93%

Knowledge Not comparable

Dolly 2.0-12b: —, Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 32.9 (#200)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkDolly 2.0-12bQwen2.5-Coder-32B
ARC (AI2) Challenge39.6%70.5%
MMLU26.2%79.1%
LMArena Expert—1221
BoolQ56.3%—
OpenBookQA39.2%—

Multilingual Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads

Dolly 2.0-12b: 17.4 (#291), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 38.0 (#230)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkDolly 2.0-12bQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Non-English8361205
LMArena Chinese8361222
LMArena Russian—1228

Instruction Following Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads

Dolly 2.0-12b: 38.9 (#299), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 61.6 (#240)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkDolly 2.0-12bQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Instruction Following8141223
LiveBench Instruction Following—58.7%

Long Context Not comparable

Dolly 2.0-12b: —, Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 37.9 (#204)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkDolly 2.0-12bQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Longer Query—1251

Writing & Preference Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads

Dolly 2.0-12b: 15.3 (#306), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 41.8 (#235)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkDolly 2.0-12bQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Text8511230
LMArena Creative Writing8641174
LMArena Multi-Turn7401222
LiveBench Language—23.3%

Frequently asked questions

Is Dolly 2.0-12b better than Qwen2.5-Coder-32B?

Qwen2.5-Coder-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.9 to 24.9 on the Noometry Index.

Is Dolly 2.0-12b or Qwen2.5-Coder-32B better for coding?

They score almost the same on coding (23.0 vs 22.4); test both on your own repository before choosing.

How many benchmarks do Dolly 2.0-12b and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B share?

14 benchmarks have published results for both models. Dolly 2.0-12b has 17 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has 31.

Related comparisons

Go deeper