Model comparison
Llama 13b vs Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 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 Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 in 6 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads 49.4 to 13.8.
- Llama 13b has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Llama 13b | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 24.4 | 38.8 |
| Released | 2023-02-24 | — |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 21 | 14 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads
Llama 13b: 21.4 (#337), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 38.5 (#175)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 683 | 1314 |
Reasoning Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads
Llama 13b: 14.0 (#329), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 25.9 (#141)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 728 | 1299 |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 37.9% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 100.58 | — |
| HellaSwag | 79.2% | — |
| LAMBADA | 75.2% | — |
| PIQA | 80.1% | — |
| WinoGrande | 73% | — |
Math Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads
Llama 13b: 26.7 (#256), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 36.1 (#174)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 838 | 1298 |
| GSM8K | 20.6% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Llama 13b: —, Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 35.5 (#183)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | — | 1289 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 52.7% | — |
| BoolQ | 78.7% | — |
| MMLU | 47.7% | — |
| OpenBookQA | 56.4% | — |
| TriviaQA | 77.9% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Llama 13b: —, Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: —
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| ScienceQA | 43.3% | — |
Multilingual Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads
Llama 13b: 16.6 (#297), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 41.9 (#201)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 819 | 1265 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1314 |
| LMArena German | — | 1231 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1207 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1271 |
Instruction Following Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads
Llama 13b: 36.7 (#305), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 67.2 (#199)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 781 | 1275 |
Long Context Not comparable
Llama 13b: —, Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 39.2 (#184)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1292 |
Writing & Preference Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads
Llama 13b: 13.8 (#312), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 49.4 (#192)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 834 | 1299 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 794 | 1262 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 753 | 1299 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Llama 13b better than Qwen2.5 Plus 1127?
Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 24.4 on the Noometry Index.
Is Llama 13b or Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 better for coding?
Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.5 versus 21.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Llama 13b and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 share?
8 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 13b has 21 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 has 14.