Noometry

Model comparison

Falcon-180B vs Qwen2.5-Max

Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.7 to 32.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 7 shared benchmarks.

Falcon-180B Technology Innovation Institute

32.2

Rank #260 Confirmed

Qwen2.5-Max Alibaba (Qwen)

40.7

Rank #146 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 7 benchmarks with published results for both. Falcon-180B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen2.5-Max in 4 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen2.5-Max leads 55.4 to 29.1.
  • Falcon-180B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Falcon-180BQwen2.5-Max
ProviderTechnology Innovation InstituteAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index32.240.7
Released2023-09-062025-01-25
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window——
Max output——
Input $ / M tokens——
Output $ / M tokens——
Results tracked1627

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Falcon-180B: —, Qwen2.5-Max: 41.8 (#117)

BenchmarkFalcon-180BQwen2.5-Max
LiveBench Coding—64.4%
LMArena Coding—1359

Reasoning Qwen2.5-Max leads

Falcon-180B: 19.1 (#269), Qwen2.5-Max: 25.6 (#147)

BenchmarkFalcon-180BQwen2.5-Max
LMArena Hard Prompts10071360
Epoch Capabilities Index112.13132.53
LiveBench Reasoning—51.4%
LiveBench Data Analysis—67.9%
HellaSwag89%—
LAMBADA79.8%—
LiveBench—62.3%
PIQA84.9%—
WinoGrande87.1%—

Math Not comparable

Falcon-180B: —, Qwen2.5-Max: 36.9 (#162)

BenchmarkFalcon-180BQwen2.5-Max
LiveBench Math—58.4%
LMArena Math—1369
GSM8K54.4%—

Knowledge Not comparable

Falcon-180B: —, Qwen2.5-Max: 35.3 (#186)

BenchmarkFalcon-180BQwen2.5-Max
Confabulations—21.8%
LMArena Expert—1337
ARC (AI2) Challenge67.8%—
BoolQ89%—
MMLU70.6%—
OpenBookQA64.2%—

Multilingual Qwen2.5-Max leads

Falcon-180B: 25.2 (#286), Qwen2.5-Max: 48.1 (#146)

BenchmarkFalcon-180BQwen2.5-Max
LMArena Non-English10001352
LMArena Chinese—1382
LMArena French—1396
LMArena German—1350
LMArena Japanese—1300
LMArena Korean—1304
LMArena Russian—1353
LMArena Spanish—1377

Instruction Following Qwen2.5-Max leads

Falcon-180B: 53.4 (#286), Qwen2.5-Max: 71.3 (#152)

BenchmarkFalcon-180BQwen2.5-Max
LMArena Instruction Following10471335
LiveBench Instruction Following—75.3%

Long Context Not comparable

Falcon-180B: —, Qwen2.5-Max: 41.4 (#142)

BenchmarkFalcon-180BQwen2.5-Max
LMArena Longer Query—1358

Writing & Preference Qwen2.5-Max leads

Falcon-180B: 29.1 (#295), Qwen2.5-Max: 55.4 (#146)

BenchmarkFalcon-180BQwen2.5-Max
LMArena Text10541367
LMArena Creative Writing10891339
LMArena Multi-Turn10131364
Short-Story Creative Writing—72.9%
LiveBench Language—56.3%

Frequently asked questions

Is Falcon-180B better than Qwen2.5-Max?

Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.7 to 32.2 on the Noometry Index.

How many benchmarks do Falcon-180B and Qwen2.5-Max share?

7 benchmarks have published results for both models. Falcon-180B has 16 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Max has 27.

Related comparisons

Go deeper