Model comparison
Granite 4.0 H Small vs Qwen2.5-Max
Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.7 to 36.5 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Granite 4.0 H Small 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 43.8.
- Granite 4.0 H Small has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Granite 4.0 H Small | Qwen2.5-Max | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | IBM | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 36.5 | 40.7 |
| Released | — | 2025-01-25 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 19 | 27 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen2.5-Max leads
Granite 4.0 H Small: 36.4 (#209), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.8 (#117)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 H Small | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1249 | 1359 |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 64.4% |
Reasoning Qwen2.5-Max leads
Granite 4.0 H Small: 24.4 (#163), Qwen2.5-Max: 25.6 (#147)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 H Small | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1240 | 1360 |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 51.4% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 67.9% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 132.53 |
| LiveBench | — | 62.3% |
Math Qwen2.5-Max leads
Granite 4.0 H Small: 31.4 (#223), Qwen2.5-Max: 36.9 (#162)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 H Small | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1247 | 1369 |
| Omni-MATH | 29.6% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 58.4% |
Knowledge Qwen2.5-Max leads
Granite 4.0 H Small: 32.0 (#215), Qwen2.5-Max: 35.3 (#186)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 H Small | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1251 | 1337 |
| MMLU-Pro | 56.9% | — |
| Confabulations | — | 21.8% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 5.2% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 38.3% | — |
Multilingual Qwen2.5-Max leads
Granite 4.0 H Small: 38.6 (#228), Qwen2.5-Max: 48.1 (#146)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 H Small | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1216 | 1352 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1249 | 1382 |
| LMArena Russian | 1201 | 1353 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1258 | 1377 |
| LMArena French | — | 1396 |
| LMArena German | — | 1350 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1300 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1304 |
Instruction Following Qwen2.5-Max leads
Granite 4.0 H Small: 68.7 (#183), Qwen2.5-Max: 71.3 (#152)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 H Small | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1222 | 1335 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 75.3% |
| IFEval | 89% | — |
Long Context Qwen2.5-Max leads
Granite 4.0 H Small: 37.7 (#213), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.4 (#142)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 H Small | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1242 | 1358 |
Writing & Preference Qwen2.5-Max leads
Granite 4.0 H Small: 43.8 (#227), Qwen2.5-Max: 55.4 (#146)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 H Small | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1241 | 1367 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1211 | 1339 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1242 | 1364 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 72.9% |
| WildBench | 73.9% | — |
| LiveBench Language | — | 56.3% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Granite 4.0 H Small better than Qwen2.5-Max?
Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.7 to 36.5 on the Noometry Index.
Is Granite 4.0 H Small or Qwen2.5-Max better for coding?
Qwen2.5-Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.8 versus 36.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Granite 4.0 H Small and Qwen2.5-Max share?
13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 4.0 H Small has 19 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Max has 27.