Model comparison

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct vs Qwen2-72B

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.4 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct IBM

32.4

Rank #258 Confirmed

Qwen2-72B Alibaba (Qwen)

30.0

Rank #300 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Granite 3.1 8b Instruct scores higher in 4 categories and Qwen2-72B in 5 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads 31.1 to 21.2.

Side by side

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct and Qwen2-72B specifications
Granite 3.1 8b InstructQwen2-72B
ProviderIBMAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index32.430.0
Released—2024-06-07
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window——
Max output——
Input $ / M tokens——
Output $ / M tokens——
Results tracked1326

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), Qwen2-72B: 29.1 (#310)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructQwen2-72B
LMArena Coding11861196
WeirdML—11.3%
BigCodeBench Instruct—38.5%
BigCodeBench Complete—54%

Agentic & Tool Use Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 24.1 (#120), Qwen2-72B: 17.0 (#146)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructQwen2-72B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard27.1%—
TheAgentCompany—1.1%
METR Time Horizons—29.9%

Reasoning Qwen2-72B leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 22.1 (#207), Qwen2-72B: 23.2 (#181)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructQwen2-72B
LMArena Hard Prompts11451191
Epoch Capabilities Index—125.28

Math Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 33.0 (#209), Qwen2-72B: 30.2 (#236)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructQwen2-72B
LMArena Math11521235
MATH Level 5—39.1%

Knowledge Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 31.1 (#220), Qwen2-72B: 21.2 (#275)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructQwen2-72B
LMArena Expert11421171
GPQA Diamond—40.8%
MMLU—82.4%

Multilingual Qwen2-72B leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 30.9 (#260), Qwen2-72B: 35.9 (#244)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructQwen2-72B
LMArena Non-English10991176
LMArena Chinese11451240
LMArena Russian10921169
LMArena French—1170
LMArena German—1151
LMArena Japanese—1111
LMArena Korean—1083
LMArena Spanish—1169

Instruction Following Qwen2-72B leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 58.6 (#259), Qwen2-72B: 61.7 (#241)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructQwen2-72B
LMArena Instruction Following11311181

Long Context Too close to call

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 35.2 (#241), Qwen2-72B: 36.1 (#235)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructQwen2-72B
LMArena Longer Query11621192

Writing & Preference Qwen2-72B leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 35.5 (#266), Qwen2-72B: 40.8 (#241)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructQwen2-72B
LMArena Text11501203
LMArena Creative Writing11291181
LMArena Multi-Turn11081196

Frequently asked questions

Is Granite 3.1 8b Instruct better than Qwen2-72B?

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.4 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.

Is Granite 3.1 8b Instruct or Qwen2-72B better for coding?

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.5 versus 29.1 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Granite 3.1 8b Instruct and Qwen2-72B share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 3.1 8b Instruct has 13 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2-72B has 26.

Related comparisons

Go deeper