Noometry

Model comparison

Llama 2-70B vs Qwen3.5-Flash

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

Last verified . 21 shared benchmarks.

Llama 2-70B Meta

24.4

Rank #349 Confirmed

Qwen3.5-Flash Alibaba (Qwen)

42.5

Rank #112 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 2-70B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.5-Flash in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.5-Flash leads 43.2 to 7.4.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 0% for Llama 2-70B and 84.4% for Qwen3.5-Flash.
  • Llama 2-70B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Llama 2-70BQwen3.5-Flash
ProviderMetaAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index24.442.5
Released2023-07-182026-02-23
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window—1M
Max output—66K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.10
Output $ / M tokens—$0.40
Results tracked3532

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Llama 2-70B: 31.4 (#286), Qwen3.5-Flash: 34.2 (#242)

BenchmarkLlama 2-70BQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Coding10791412
LMArena WebDev—1244
ALE-Bench—221.8

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Llama 2-70B: —, Qwen3.5-Flash: —

BenchmarkLlama 2-70BQwen3.5-Flash
Vending-Bench 2—462.69

Reasoning Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Llama 2-70B: 14.4 (#325), Qwen3.5-Flash: 33.7 (#72)

BenchmarkLlama 2-70BQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Hard Prompts10731403
DTBench41.6%82.9%
Epoch Capabilities Index113.79143.98
Chess Puzzles—21%
Mystery Game Puzzles—20%
LMCA—29.1%
BIG-Bench Hard64.9%—
CommonsenseQA 2.050%—
ForecastBench51.4—
HellaSwag85.3%—
LAMBADA78.9%—
PIQA82.8%—
WinoGrande80.2%—

Math Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Llama 2-70B: 8.1 (#326), Qwen3.5-Flash: 37.4 (#158)

BenchmarkLlama 2-70BQwen3.5-Flash
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20250%84.4%
LMArena Math10911407
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—18.2%
MATH Level 53.3%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—6.2%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—0%
GSM8K69.6%—

Knowledge Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Llama 2-70B: 7.4 (#310), Qwen3.5-Flash: 43.2 (#93)

BenchmarkLlama 2-70BQwen3.5-Flash
GPQA Diamond26.3%82.3%
LMArena Expert10391407
SimpleQA Verified—20.3%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—10.5%
ARC (AI2) Challenge78.3%—
BoolQ88.6%—
MMLU69.9%—
OpenBookQA60.2%—
TriviaQA87.6%—

Multilingual Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Llama 2-70B: 27.7 (#274), Qwen3.5-Flash: 50.5 (#121)

BenchmarkLlama 2-70BQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Non-English10451385
LMArena Chinese9951446
LMArena French10901412
LMArena German10411390
LMArena Japanese9271368
LMArena Korean9641344
LMArena Russian10831379
LMArena Spanish11431400

Instruction Following Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Llama 2-70B: 54.9 (#278), Qwen3.5-Flash: 72.6 (#139)

BenchmarkLlama 2-70BQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Instruction Following10711374

Long Context Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Llama 2-70B: 32.3 (#270), Qwen3.5-Flash: 42.4 (#124)

BenchmarkLlama 2-70BQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Longer Query10621392

Writing & Preference Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Llama 2-70B: 32.3 (#279), Qwen3.5-Flash: 57.9 (#122)

BenchmarkLlama 2-70BQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text11151397
LMArena Creative Writing10751343
LMArena Multi-Turn10881393

Frequently asked questions

Is Llama 2-70B 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 2-70B or Qwen3.5-Flash better for coding?

Qwen3.5-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.2 versus 31.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Llama 2-70B and Qwen3.5-Flash share?

21 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 2-70B has 35 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5-Flash has 32.

Related comparisons

Go deeper