Model comparison
Llama 13b vs Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 29.0 to 24.4 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.
Meta
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 13b scores higher in 1 category and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct in 4 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen2.5 7B Instruct leads 48.8 to 13.8.
Side by side
| Llama 13b | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 24.4 | 29.0 |
| Released | 2023-02-24 | 2024-09 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 131K |
| Max output | — | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.17 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.70 |
| Results tracked | 21 | 15 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen2.5 7B Instruct leads
Llama 13b: 21.4 (#337), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 36.5 (#208)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 37.6% |
| LMArena Coding | 683 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 46.1% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Llama 13b: —, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 23.8 (#124)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| BALROG | — | 7.8% |
Reasoning Too close to call
Llama 13b: 14.0 (#329), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 14.8 (#322)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 100.58 | 118.51 |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 728 | — |
| DTBench | — | 47.7% |
| LMCA | — | 6.4% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 37.9% | — |
| HellaSwag | 79.2% | — |
| LAMBADA | 75.2% | — |
| PIQA | 80.1% | — |
| WinoGrande | 73% | — |
Math Llama 13b leads
Llama 13b: 26.7 (#256), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 12.6 (#306)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 2.5% |
| Omni-MATH | — | 29.4% |
| LMArena Math | 838 | — |
| GSM8K | 20.6% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Llama 13b: —, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 17.0 (#286)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU | 47.7% | 72.9% |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 35.5% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 53.9% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 34.1% |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 52.7% | — |
| BoolQ | 78.7% | — |
| OpenBookQA | 56.4% | — |
| TriviaQA | 77.9% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Llama 13b: —, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| ScienceQA | 43.3% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Llama 13b: 16.6 (#297), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 819 | — |
Instruction Following Qwen2.5 7B Instruct leads
Llama 13b: 36.7 (#305), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 63.2 (#231)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | — | 74.1% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 781 | — |
Writing & Preference Qwen2.5 7B Instruct leads
Llama 13b: 13.8 (#312), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 48.8 (#195)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 834 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 794 | — |
| WildBench | — | 73.1% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 753 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Llama 13b better than Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 29.0 to 24.4 on the Noometry Index.
Is Llama 13b or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct better for coding?
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 36.5 versus 21.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Llama 13b and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct share?
2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 13b has 21 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has 15.