Model comparison
Llama 13b vs Qwen1.5-72B
Qwen1.5-72B is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.8 to 24.4 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 8 shared benchmarks.
Meta
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 8 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 13b scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen1.5-72B in 6 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen1.5-72B leads 37.3 to 13.8.
Side by side
| Llama 13b | Qwen1.5-72B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 24.4 | 30.8 |
| Released | 2023-02-24 | 2024-02-04 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 21 | 22 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen1.5-72B leads
Llama 13b: 21.4 (#337), Qwen1.5-72B: 31.9 (#277)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 683 | 1165 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 33.2% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 40.3% |
| HumanEval+ | — | 59.1% |
| MBPP+ | — | 61.6% |
Reasoning Qwen1.5-72B leads
Llama 13b: 14.0 (#329), Qwen1.5-72B: 22.2 (#203)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 728 | 1148 |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 37.9% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 100.58 | — |
| HellaSwag | 79.2% | — |
| LAMBADA | 75.2% | — |
| PIQA | 80.1% | — |
| WinoGrande | 73% | — |
Math Qwen1.5-72B leads
Llama 13b: 26.7 (#256), Qwen1.5-72B: 33.2 (#205)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 838 | 1164 |
| GSM8K | 20.6% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Llama 13b: —, Qwen1.5-72B: 11.5 (#300)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 28.8% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1136 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 52.7% | — |
| BoolQ | 78.7% | — |
| MMLU | 47.7% | — |
| OpenBookQA | 56.4% | — |
| TriviaQA | 77.9% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Llama 13b: —, Qwen1.5-72B: —
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| ScienceQA | 43.3% | — |
Multilingual Qwen1.5-72B leads
Llama 13b: 16.6 (#297), Qwen1.5-72B: 33.2 (#253)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 819 | 1135 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1186 |
| LMArena French | — | 1159 |
| LMArena German | — | 1084 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1061 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1050 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1104 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1110 |
Instruction Following Qwen1.5-72B leads
Llama 13b: 36.7 (#305), Qwen1.5-72B: 59.3 (#256)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 781 | 1141 |
Long Context Not comparable
Llama 13b: —, Qwen1.5-72B: 35.1 (#243)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1157 |
Writing & Preference Qwen1.5-72B leads
Llama 13b: 13.8 (#312), Qwen1.5-72B: 37.3 (#258)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 834 | 1166 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 794 | 1137 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 753 | 1160 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Llama 13b better than Qwen1.5-72B?
Qwen1.5-72B is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.8 to 24.4 on the Noometry Index.
Is Llama 13b or Qwen1.5-72B better for coding?
Qwen1.5-72B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 31.9 versus 21.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Llama 13b and Qwen1.5-72B share?
8 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 13b has 21 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-72B has 22.