Model comparison

Llama 2-7B vs Qwen2.5-Coder-32B

Qwen2.5-Coder-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.4 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.

Llama 2-7B Meta

29.1

Rank #317 Confirmed

Qwen2.5-Coder-32B Alibaba (Qwen)

33.4

Rank #245 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 2-7B scores higher in 1 category and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B in 7 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in multilingual, where Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads 37.8 to 23.8.

Side by side

Llama 2-7B and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B specifications
Llama 2-7BQwen2.5-Coder-32B
ProviderMetaAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index29.133.4
Released2023-07-182024-09-18
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—33K
Max output—29K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.66
Output $ / M tokens—$1
Results tracked2931

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

Category by category

Coding Llama 2-7B leads

Llama 2-7B: 29.2 (#307), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 22.6 (#333)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-7BQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Coding10021276
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)—9%
Aider Polyglot—16.4%
BigCodeBench Instruct—49%
LiveBench Coding—56.9%
BigCodeBench Complete—58%
HumanEval+—87.2%
MBPP+—77%

Reasoning Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads

Llama 2-7B: 15.7 (#312), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 21.2 (#225)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-7BQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Hard Prompts10091251
Epoch Capabilities Index99.06119.49
HellaSwag77.2%83%
WinoGrande69.2%80.8%
Chess Puzzles0%—
LiveBench Reasoning—42.1%
LiveBench Data Analysis—49.9%
BIG-Bench Hard39.2%—
LAMBADA73.3%—
LiveBench—46.2%
PIQA78.8%—

Math Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads

Llama 2-7B: 30.7 (#233), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 33.3 (#204)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-7BQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Math10421251
GSM8K16.7%93%
LiveBench Math—46.6%

Knowledge Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads

Llama 2-7B: 28.2 (#248), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 33.4 (#203)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-7BQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Expert10361221
ARC (AI2) Challenge45.9%70.5%
MMLU45.8%79.1%
BoolQ77.9%—
OpenBookQA58.6%—
TriviaQA73.7%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Llama 2-7B: —, Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-7BQwen2.5-Coder-32B
ScienceQA43.1%—

Multilingual Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads

Llama 2-7B: 23.8 (#293), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 37.8 (#235)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-7BQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Non-English9731205
LMArena Chinese9731222
LMArena Russian9951228
LMArena French970—
LMArena German978—
LMArena Spanish1007—

Instruction Following Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads

Llama 2-7B: 50.8 (#298), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 61.4 (#245)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-7BQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Instruction Following10061223
LiveBench Instruction Following—58.7%

Long Context Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads

Llama 2-7B: 30.4 (#287), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 38.0 (#208)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-7BQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Longer Query9991251

Writing & Preference Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads

Llama 2-7B: 28.0 (#298), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 41.6 (#240)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-7BQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Text10531230
LMArena Creative Writing10331174
LMArena Multi-Turn10291222
LiveBench Language—23.3%

Frequently asked questions

Is Llama 2-7B better than Qwen2.5-Coder-32B?

Qwen2.5-Coder-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.4 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.

Is Llama 2-7B or Qwen2.5-Coder-32B better for coding?

Llama 2-7B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 29.2 versus 22.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Llama 2-7B and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 2-7B has 29 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has 31.

Related comparisons

Go deeper