Model comparison

Granite 3.0 8b Instruct vs Qwen2.5 14B Instruct

Granite 3.0 8b Instruct has enough public results to be ranked (#266); Qwen2.5 14B Instruct does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.

Granite 3.0 8b Instruct IBM

31.1

Rank #266 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Granite 3.0 8b Instruct scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen2.5 14B Instruct in 1 category; one gap is clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in coding, where Qwen2.5 14B Instruct leads 37.1 to 29.1.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is BigCodeBench Complete: 35.4% for Granite 3.0 8b Instruct and 52.2% for Qwen2.5 14B Instruct.

Side by side

Granite 3.0 8b Instruct and Qwen2.5 14B Instruct specifications
Granite 3.0 8b InstructQwen2.5 14B Instruct
ProviderIBMAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index31.138.2
Released—2024-09
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—131K
Max output—8K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.35
Output $ / M tokens—$1.40
Results tracked143

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen2.5 14B Instruct leads

Granite 3.0 8b Instruct: 29.1 (#297), Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: 37.1 (#187)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 8b InstructQwen2.5 14B Instruct
BigCodeBench Instruct29.3%39.8%
BigCodeBench Complete35.4%52.2%
LMArena Coding1113—

Reasoning Not comparable

Granite 3.0 8b Instruct: 20.0 (#227), Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: —

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 8b InstructQwen2.5 14B Instruct
LMArena Hard Prompts1092—

Math Not comparable

Granite 3.0 8b Instruct: 30.3 (#211), Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: —

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 8b InstructQwen2.5 14B Instruct
LMArena Math1143—

Knowledge Not comparable

Granite 3.0 8b Instruct: 29.1 (#233), Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 8b InstructQwen2.5 14B Instruct
LMArena Expert1087—
MMLU—79.9%

Multilingual Not comparable

Granite 3.0 8b Instruct: 27.4 (#271), Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 8b InstructQwen2.5 14B Instruct
LMArena Non-English1037—
LMArena Chinese1063—
LMArena Russian1060—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Granite 3.0 8b Instruct: 56.2 (#271), Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 8b InstructQwen2.5 14B Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following1088—

Long Context Not comparable

Granite 3.0 8b Instruct: 34.0 (#247), Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 8b InstructQwen2.5 14B Instruct
LMArena Longer Query1122—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Granite 3.0 8b Instruct: 31.2 (#280), Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 8b InstructQwen2.5 14B Instruct
LMArena Text1096—
LMArena Creative Writing1071—
LMArena Multi-Turn1063—

Frequently asked questions

Is Granite 3.0 8b Instruct better than Qwen2.5 14B Instruct?

Granite 3.0 8b Instruct has enough public results to be ranked (#266); Qwen2.5 14B Instruct does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Is Granite 3.0 8b Instruct or Qwen2.5 14B Instruct better for coding?

Qwen2.5 14B Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.1 versus 29.1 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Granite 3.0 8b Instruct and Qwen2.5 14B Instruct share?

2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 3.0 8b Instruct has 14 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 14B Instruct has 3.

Related comparisons

Go deeper