Model comparison
Granite 3.1 8b Instruct vs Qwen2.5-Max
Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.7 to 32.4 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 0 categories and Qwen2.5-Max in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen2.5-Max leads 55.4 to 35.5.
- Granite 3.1 8b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | Qwen2.5-Max | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | IBM | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 32.4 | 40.7 |
| Released | — | 2025-01-25 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 13 | 27 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen2.5-Max leads
Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 34.5 (#233), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.8 (#117)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1186 | 1359 |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 64.4% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 24.1 (#120), Qwen2.5-Max: —
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 27.1% | — |
Reasoning Qwen2.5-Max leads
Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 22.1 (#207), Qwen2.5-Max: 25.6 (#147)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1145 | 1360 |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 51.4% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 67.9% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 132.53 |
| LiveBench | — | 62.3% |
Math Qwen2.5-Max leads
Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 33.0 (#209), Qwen2.5-Max: 36.9 (#162)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1152 | 1369 |
| LiveBench Math | — | 58.4% |
Knowledge Qwen2.5-Max leads
Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 31.1 (#220), Qwen2.5-Max: 35.3 (#186)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1142 | 1337 |
| Confabulations | — | 21.8% |
Multilingual Qwen2.5-Max leads
Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 30.9 (#260), Qwen2.5-Max: 48.1 (#146)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1099 | 1352 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1145 | 1382 |
| LMArena Russian | 1092 | 1353 |
| LMArena French | — | 1396 |
| LMArena German | — | 1350 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1300 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1304 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1377 |
Instruction Following Qwen2.5-Max leads
Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 58.6 (#259), Qwen2.5-Max: 71.3 (#152)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1131 | 1335 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 75.3% |
Long Context Qwen2.5-Max leads
Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 35.2 (#241), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.4 (#142)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1162 | 1358 |
Writing & Preference Qwen2.5-Max leads
Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 35.5 (#266), Qwen2.5-Max: 55.4 (#146)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1150 | 1367 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1129 | 1339 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1108 | 1364 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 72.9% |
| LiveBench Language | — | 56.3% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Granite 3.1 8b Instruct better than Qwen2.5-Max?
Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.7 to 32.4 on the Noometry Index.
Is Granite 3.1 8b Instruct or Qwen2.5-Max better for coding?
Qwen2.5-Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.8 versus 34.5 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Granite 3.1 8b Instruct and Qwen2.5-Max share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 3.1 8b Instruct has 13 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Max has 27.