Model comparison
Falcon-180B vs Qwen1.5-7B
Falcon-180B and Qwen1.5-7B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (32.2 vs 31.4), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 7 shared benchmarks.
Technology Innovation Institute
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 7 benchmarks with published results for both. Falcon-180B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen1.5-7B in 4 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in multilingual, where Qwen1.5-7B leads 28.5 to 25.2.
Side by side
| Falcon-180B | Qwen1.5-7B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Technology Innovation Institute | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 32.2 | 31.4 |
| Released | 2023-09-06 | 2024-02-04 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 16 | 13 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Falcon-180B: —, Qwen1.5-7B: 32.2 (#276)
| Benchmark | Falcon-180B | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | — | 1107 |
Reasoning Qwen1.5-7B leads
Falcon-180B: 19.1 (#269), Qwen1.5-7B: 20.4 (#240)
| Benchmark | Falcon-180B | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1007 | 1065 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 112.13 | — |
| HellaSwag | 89% | — |
| LAMBADA | 79.8% | — |
| PIQA | 84.9% | — |
| WinoGrande | 87.1% | — |
Math Not comparable
Falcon-180B: —, Qwen1.5-7B: 31.4 (#224)
| Benchmark | Falcon-180B | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | — | 1080 |
| GSM8K | 54.4% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Falcon-180B: —, Qwen1.5-7B: 28.7 (#243)
| Benchmark | Falcon-180B | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU | 70.6% | 62.6% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1055 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 67.8% | — |
| BoolQ | 89% | — |
| OpenBookQA | 64.2% | — |
Multilingual Qwen1.5-7B leads
Falcon-180B: 25.2 (#286), Qwen1.5-7B: 28.5 (#271)
| Benchmark | Falcon-180B | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1000 | 1058 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1141 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1006 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
Falcon-180B: 53.4 (#286), Qwen1.5-7B: 54.1 (#281)
| Benchmark | Falcon-180B | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1047 | 1058 |
Long Context Not comparable
Falcon-180B: —, Qwen1.5-7B: 33.1 (#266)
| Benchmark | Falcon-180B | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1090 |
Writing & Preference Too close to call
Falcon-180B: 29.1 (#295), Qwen1.5-7B: 29.6 (#293)
| Benchmark | Falcon-180B | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1054 | 1083 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1089 | 1035 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1013 | 1062 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Falcon-180B better than Qwen1.5-7B?
Falcon-180B and Qwen1.5-7B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (32.2 vs 31.4), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
How many benchmarks do Falcon-180B and Qwen1.5-7B share?
7 benchmarks have published results for both models. Falcon-180B has 16 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-7B has 13.