Model comparison
Granite 3.1 8b Instruct vs Qwen1.5-32B
Granite 3.1 8b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.4 to 30.5 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Granite 3.1 8b Instruct scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen1.5-32B in 2 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads 31.1 to 13.5.
Side by side
| Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | Qwen1.5-32B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | IBM | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 32.4 | 30.5 |
| Released | — | 2024-02-04 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 13 | 21 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads
Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 34.5 (#233), Qwen1.5-32B: 31.7 (#282)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1186 | 1155 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 32.3% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 42% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 24.1 (#120), Qwen1.5-32B: —
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 27.1% | — |
Reasoning Too close to call
Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 22.1 (#207), Qwen1.5-32B: 21.8 (#212)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1145 | 1130 |
Math Too close to call
Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 33.0 (#209), Qwen1.5-32B: 33.0 (#207)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1152 | 1155 |
Knowledge Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads
Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 31.1 (#220), Qwen1.5-32B: 13.5 (#296)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1142 | 1126 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 30.7% |
| MMLU | — | 74.4% |
Multilingual Too close to call
Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 30.9 (#260), Qwen1.5-32B: 31.4 (#259)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1099 | 1106 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1145 | 1177 |
| LMArena Russian | 1092 | 1073 |
| LMArena French | — | 1101 |
| LMArena German | — | 1058 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1027 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1008 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1089 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 58.6 (#259), Qwen1.5-32B: 57.7 (#265)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1131 | 1116 |
Long Context Too close to call
Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 35.2 (#241), Qwen1.5-32B: 34.7 (#246)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1162 | 1146 |
Writing & Preference Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads
Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 35.5 (#266), Qwen1.5-32B: 34.2 (#271)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1150 | 1137 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1129 | 1083 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1108 | 1140 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Granite 3.1 8b Instruct better than Qwen1.5-32B?
Granite 3.1 8b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.4 to 30.5 on the Noometry Index.
Is Granite 3.1 8b Instruct or Qwen1.5-32B better for coding?
Granite 3.1 8b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.5 versus 31.7 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Granite 3.1 8b Instruct and Qwen1.5-32B share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 3.1 8b Instruct has 13 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-32B has 21.