Noometry

Model comparison

Llama 2-13B vs Qwen3.7 Max

Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.

Llama 2-13B Meta

29.6

Rank #309 Confirmed

Qwen3.7 Max Alibaba (Qwen)

51.5

Rank #42 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 2-13B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.7 Max in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.7 Max leads 49.2 to 12.8.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 42.2% for Llama 2-13B and 92.3% for Qwen3.7 Max.
  • Llama 2-13B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Llama 2-13BQwen3.7 Max
ProviderMetaAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index29.651.5
Released2023-07-182026-05-19
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window—1M
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$2.50
Output $ / M tokens—$7.50
Results tracked3233

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.7 Max leads

Llama 2-13B: 30.9 (#291), Qwen3.7 Max: 50.4 (#45)

BenchmarkLlama 2-13BQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Coding10621498
SWE-bench Verified—77.3%
LMArena WebDev—1515
SciCode—48.8%
ALE-Bench—1,189

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Llama 2-13B: —, Qwen3.7 Max: 22.1 (#135)

BenchmarkLlama 2-13BQwen3.7 Max
GBAEval—0.4%

Reasoning Qwen3.7 Max leads

Llama 2-13B: 12.8 (#337), Qwen3.7 Max: 49.2 (#38)

BenchmarkLlama 2-13BQwen3.7 Max
Chess Puzzles0%19%
LMArena Hard Prompts10511483
DTBench42.2%92.3%
Epoch Capabilities Index106.17153.68
SimpleBench—70.4%
NYT Connections (extended)—85.1%
CritPt—13.4%
EBR-Bench—9.5%
Mystery Game Puzzles—32%
LMCA—44%
BIG-Bench Hard58.2%—
HellaSwag80.7%—
LAMBADA76.5%—
PIQA80.8%—
WinoGrande72.8%—

Math Qwen3.7 Max leads

Llama 2-13B: 31.1 (#229), Qwen3.7 Max: 62.4 (#32)

BenchmarkLlama 2-13BQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Math10651490
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—64.6%
FrontierMath Tier 4—34.1%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—95.6%
ProofBench—26%
GSM8K36.9%—

Knowledge Qwen3.7 Max leads

Llama 2-13B: 28.1 (#249), Qwen3.7 Max: 61.6 (#28)

BenchmarkLlama 2-13BQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Expert10301488
GPQA Diamond—90.9%
SimpleQA Verified—55.8%
ARC (AI2) Challenge60.3%—
BoolQ82.4%—
MMLU55.6%—
OpenBookQA57%—
TriviaQA79.6%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Llama 2-13B: —, Qwen3.7 Max: —

BenchmarkLlama 2-13BQwen3.7 Max
ScienceQA55.8%—

Multilingual Qwen3.7 Max leads

Llama 2-13B: 26.5 (#279), Qwen3.7 Max: 56.9 (#15)

BenchmarkLlama 2-13BQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Non-English10241474
LMArena Chinese10011530
LMArena Russian10551484
LMArena French1044—
LMArena German1009—
LMArena Japanese894—
LMArena Korean953—
LMArena Spanish1087—

Instruction Following Qwen3.7 Max leads

Llama 2-13B: 53.3 (#287), Qwen3.7 Max: 76.7 (#38)

BenchmarkLlama 2-13BQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Instruction Following10451460

Long Context Qwen3.7 Max leads

Llama 2-13B: 32.3 (#269), Qwen3.7 Max: 45.4 (#40)

BenchmarkLlama 2-13BQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Longer Query10641482

Writing & Preference Qwen3.7 Max leads

Llama 2-13B: 29.8 (#289), Qwen3.7 Max: 65.0 (#54)

BenchmarkLlama 2-13BQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Text10841476
LMArena Creative Writing10471449
LMArena Multi-Turn10501481
EQ-Bench 4—1110

Frequently asked questions

Is Llama 2-13B better than Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.

Is Llama 2-13B or Qwen3.7 Max better for coding?

Qwen3.7 Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.4 versus 30.9 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Llama 2-13B and Qwen3.7 Max share?

15 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 2-13B has 32 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Max has 33.

Related comparisons

Go deeper