Model comparison

Llama 2-70B 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 . 5 shared benchmarks.

Llama 2-70B Meta

24.4

Rank #349 Confirmed

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct Alibaba (Qwen)

29.0

Rank #320 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 5 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 2-70B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct in 6 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen2.5 7B Instruct leads 48.8 to 32.3.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 26.3% for Llama 2-70B and 35.5% for Qwen2.5 7B Instruct.

Side by side

Llama 2-70B and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct specifications
Llama 2-70BQwen2.5 7B Instruct
ProviderMetaAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index24.429.0
Released2023-07-182024-09
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—131K
Max output—8K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.17
Output $ / M tokens—$0.70
Results tracked3515

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen2.5 7B Instruct leads

Llama 2-70B: 31.4 (#286), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 36.5 (#208)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-70BQwen2.5 7B Instruct
BigCodeBench Instruct—37.6%
LMArena Coding1079—
BigCodeBench Complete—46.1%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Llama 2-70B: —, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 23.8 (#124)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-70BQwen2.5 7B Instruct
BALROG—7.8%

Reasoning Too close to call

Llama 2-70B: 14.4 (#325), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 14.8 (#322)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-70BQwen2.5 7B Instruct
DTBench41.6%47.7%
Epoch Capabilities Index113.79118.51
Chess Puzzles—0%
LMArena Hard Prompts1073—
LMCA—6.4%
BIG-Bench Hard64.9%—
CommonsenseQA 2.050%—
ForecastBench51.4—
HellaSwag85.3%—
LAMBADA78.9%—
PIQA82.8%—
WinoGrande80.2%—

Math Qwen2.5 7B Instruct leads

Llama 2-70B: 8.1 (#326), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 12.6 (#306)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-70BQwen2.5 7B Instruct
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20250%2.5%
Omni-MATH—29.4%
LMArena Math1091—
MATH Level 53.3%—
GSM8K69.6%—

Knowledge Qwen2.5 7B Instruct leads

Llama 2-70B: 7.4 (#310), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 17.0 (#286)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-70BQwen2.5 7B Instruct
GPQA Diamond26.3%35.5%
MMLU69.9%72.9%
MMLU-Pro—53.9%
GPQA (HELM)—34.1%
LMArena Expert1039—
ARC (AI2) Challenge78.3%—
BoolQ88.6%—
OpenBookQA60.2%—
TriviaQA87.6%—

Multilingual Not comparable

Llama 2-70B: 27.7 (#274), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-70BQwen2.5 7B Instruct
LMArena Non-English1045—
LMArena Chinese995—
LMArena French1090—
LMArena German1041—
LMArena Japanese927—
LMArena Korean964—
LMArena Russian1083—
LMArena Spanish1143—

Instruction Following Qwen2.5 7B Instruct leads

Llama 2-70B: 54.9 (#278), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 63.2 (#231)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-70BQwen2.5 7B Instruct
IFEval—74.1%
LMArena Instruction Following1071—

Long Context Not comparable

Llama 2-70B: 32.3 (#270), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-70BQwen2.5 7B Instruct
LMArena Longer Query1062—

Writing & Preference Qwen2.5 7B Instruct leads

Llama 2-70B: 32.3 (#279), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 48.8 (#195)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-70BQwen2.5 7B Instruct
LMArena Text1115—
LMArena Creative Writing1075—
WildBench—73.1%
LMArena Multi-Turn1088—

Frequently asked questions

Is Llama 2-70B 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 2-70B or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct better for coding?

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 36.5 versus 31.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Llama 2-70B and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct share?

5 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 2-70B has 35 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has 15.

Related comparisons

Go deeper