Model comparison
Granite 3.0 2b Instruct vs Qwen-14B
Granite 3.0 2b Instruct and Qwen-14B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (30.8 vs 31.4), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 10 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. Granite 3.0 2b Instruct scores higher in 5 categories and Qwen-14B in 2 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
Side by side
| Granite 3.0 2b Instruct | Qwen-14B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | IBM | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 30.8 | 31.4 |
| Released | — | 2023-09-24 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 13 | 18 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen-14B leads
Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 28.3 (#316), Qwen-14B: 31.2 (#288)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.0 2b Instruct | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1090 | 1071 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 20.5% | — |
Reasoning Too close to call
Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 20.5 (#235), Qwen-14B: 19.6 (#257)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.0 2b Instruct | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1073 | 1027 |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 55% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 113.03 |
| LAMBADA | — | 71.1% |
| PIQA | — | 79.9% |
Math Granite 3.0 2b Instruct leads
Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 32.2 (#217), Qwen-14B: 31.2 (#227)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.0 2b Instruct | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1117 | 1068 |
| GSM8K | — | 61.3% |
Knowledge Not comparable
Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 29.0 (#241), Qwen-14B: —
| Benchmark | Granite 3.0 2b Instruct | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1064 | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 84.4% |
| BoolQ | — | 86.2% |
| MMLU | — | 66.3% |
Multilingual Too close to call
Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 27.0 (#278), Qwen-14B: 27.5 (#275)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.0 2b Instruct | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1033 | 1041 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1070 | 1077 |
| LMArena Russian | 1045 | — |
Instruction Following Granite 3.0 2b Instruct leads
Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 53.9 (#284), Qwen-14B: 52.4 (#289)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.0 2b Instruct | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1056 | 1031 |
Long Context Granite 3.0 2b Instruct leads
Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 32.5 (#268), Qwen-14B: 31.3 (#280)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.0 2b Instruct | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1070 | 1028 |
Writing & Preference Granite 3.0 2b Instruct leads
Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 29.6 (#292), Qwen-14B: 27.6 (#299)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.0 2b Instruct | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1080 | 1051 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1046 | 1028 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1053 | 1022 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Granite 3.0 2b Instruct better than Qwen-14B?
Granite 3.0 2b Instruct and Qwen-14B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (30.8 vs 31.4), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Is Granite 3.0 2b Instruct or Qwen-14B better for coding?
Qwen-14B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 31.2 versus 28.3 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Granite 3.0 2b Instruct and Qwen-14B share?
10 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 3.0 2b Instruct has 13 scored results on Noometry and Qwen-14B has 18.