Model comparison
Llama 2-13B vs Qwen3.6 27B
Qwen3.6 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.2 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.
Meta
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 2-13B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.6 27B in 5 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.6 27B leads 52.4 to 28.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 42.2% for Llama 2-13B and 78.1% for Qwen3.6 27B.
Side by side
| Llama 2-13B | Qwen3.6 27B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 29.6 | 42.2 |
| Released | 2023-07-18 | 2026-04-22 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 262K |
| Max output | — | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.60 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $3.60 |
| Results tracked | 32 | 11 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3.6 27B leads
Llama 2-13B: 30.9 (#291), Qwen3.6 27B: 39.1 (#163)
| Benchmark | Llama 2-13B | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | — | 37.3% |
| LMArena Coding | 1062 | — |
Reasoning Qwen3.6 27B leads
Llama 2-13B: 12.8 (#337), Qwen3.6 27B: 25.0 (#153)
| Benchmark | Llama 2-13B | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | 22% |
| DTBench | 42.2% | 78.1% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 106.17 | 146.5 |
| CritPt | — | 0.9% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1051 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 7% |
| LMCA | — | 34.5% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 58.2% | — |
| HellaSwag | 80.7% | — |
| LAMBADA | 76.5% | — |
| PIQA | 80.8% | — |
| WinoGrande | 72.8% | — |
Math Qwen3.6 27B leads
Llama 2-13B: 31.1 (#229), Qwen3.6 27B: 48.5 (#62)
| Benchmark | Llama 2-13B | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 35.1% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 91.1% |
| LMArena Math | 1065 | — |
| GSM8K | 36.9% | — |
Knowledge Qwen3.6 27B leads
Llama 2-13B: 28.1 (#249), Qwen3.6 27B: 52.4 (#63)
| Benchmark | Llama 2-13B | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 85.9% |
| LMArena Expert | 1030 | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 60.3% | — |
| BoolQ | 82.4% | — |
| MMLU | 55.6% | — |
| OpenBookQA | 57% | — |
| TriviaQA | 79.6% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Llama 2-13B: —, Qwen3.6 27B: —
| Benchmark | Llama 2-13B | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| ScienceQA | 55.8% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Llama 2-13B: 26.5 (#279), Qwen3.6 27B: —
| Benchmark | Llama 2-13B | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1024 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1001 | — |
| LMArena French | 1044 | — |
| LMArena German | 1009 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 894 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 953 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1055 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1087 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Llama 2-13B: 53.3 (#287), Qwen3.6 27B: —
| Benchmark | Llama 2-13B | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1045 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Llama 2-13B: 32.3 (#269), Qwen3.6 27B: —
| Benchmark | Llama 2-13B | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1064 | — |
Writing & Preference Qwen3.6 27B leads
Llama 2-13B: 29.8 (#289), Qwen3.6 27B: 50.3 (#181)
| Benchmark | Llama 2-13B | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1084 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1047 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1026 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1050 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Llama 2-13B better than Qwen3.6 27B?
Qwen3.6 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.2 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.
Is Llama 2-13B or Qwen3.6 27B better for coding?
Qwen3.6 27B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.1 versus 30.9 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Llama 2-13B and Qwen3.6 27B share?
3 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 2-13B has 32 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 27B has 11.