Model comparison

Llama 13b vs Qwen3.5-Flash

Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.5 to 24.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 9 shared benchmarks.

Llama 13b Meta

24.4

Rank #348 Confirmed

Qwen3.5-Flash Alibaba (Qwen)

42.5

Rank #112 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 9 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 13b scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.5-Flash in 6 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen3.5-Flash leads 57.9 to 13.8.
  • Llama 13b has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Llama 13b and Qwen3.5-Flash specifications
Llama 13bQwen3.5-Flash
ProviderMetaAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index24.442.5
Released2023-02-242026-02-23
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window—1M
Max output—66K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.10
Output $ / M tokens—$0.40
Results tracked2132

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Llama 13b: 21.4 (#337), Qwen3.5-Flash: 34.2 (#242)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 13bQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Coding6831412
LMArena WebDev—1244
ALE-Bench—221.8

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Llama 13b: —, Qwen3.5-Flash: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 13bQwen3.5-Flash
Vending-Bench 2—462.69

Reasoning Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Llama 13b: 14.0 (#329), Qwen3.5-Flash: 33.7 (#72)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 13bQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Hard Prompts7281403
Epoch Capabilities Index100.58143.98
Chess Puzzles—21%
Mystery Game Puzzles—20%
DTBench—82.9%
LMCA—29.1%
BIG-Bench Hard37.9%—
HellaSwag79.2%—
LAMBADA75.2%—
PIQA80.1%—
WinoGrande73%—

Math Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Llama 13b: 26.7 (#256), Qwen3.5-Flash: 37.4 (#158)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 13bQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Math8381407
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—18.2%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—84.4%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—6.2%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—0%
GSM8K20.6%—

Knowledge Not comparable

Llama 13b: —, Qwen3.5-Flash: 43.2 (#93)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 13bQwen3.5-Flash
GPQA Diamond—82.3%
SimpleQA Verified—20.3%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—10.5%
LMArena Expert—1407
ARC (AI2) Challenge52.7%—
BoolQ78.7%—
MMLU47.7%—
OpenBookQA56.4%—
TriviaQA77.9%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Llama 13b: —, Qwen3.5-Flash: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 13bQwen3.5-Flash
ScienceQA43.3%—

Multilingual Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Llama 13b: 16.6 (#297), Qwen3.5-Flash: 50.5 (#121)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 13bQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Non-English8191385
LMArena Chinese—1446
LMArena French—1412
LMArena German—1390
LMArena Japanese—1368
LMArena Korean—1344
LMArena Russian—1379
LMArena Spanish—1400

Instruction Following Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Llama 13b: 36.7 (#305), Qwen3.5-Flash: 72.6 (#139)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 13bQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Instruction Following7811374

Long Context Not comparable

Llama 13b: —, Qwen3.5-Flash: 42.4 (#124)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 13bQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Longer Query—1392

Writing & Preference Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Llama 13b: 13.8 (#312), Qwen3.5-Flash: 57.9 (#122)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 13bQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text8341397
LMArena Creative Writing7941343
LMArena Multi-Turn7531393

Frequently asked questions

Is Llama 13b better than Qwen3.5-Flash?

Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.5 to 24.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is Llama 13b or Qwen3.5-Flash better for coding?

Qwen3.5-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.2 versus 21.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Llama 13b and Qwen3.5-Flash share?

9 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 13b has 21 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5-Flash has 32.

Related comparisons

Go deeper