Model comparison

Llama 2-7B vs Qwen3.5 122B-A10B

Qwen3.5 122B-A10B is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.1 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.

Llama 2-7B Meta

29.1

Rank #317 Confirmed

Qwen3.5 122B-A10B Alibaba (Qwen)

42.1

Rank #119 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 2-7B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.5 122B-A10B in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen3.5 122B-A10B leads 60.0 to 28.0.

Side by side

Llama 2-7B and Qwen3.5 122B-A10B specifications
Llama 2-7BQwen3.5 122B-A10B
ProviderMetaAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index29.142.1
Released2023-07-182026-02-23
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—262K
Max output—66K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.40
Output $ / M tokens—$3.20
Results tracked2927

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.5 122B-A10B leads

Llama 2-7B: 29.2 (#307), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 39.1 (#162)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-7BQwen3.5 122B-A10B
LMArena Coding10021436
LMArena WebDev—1360
SciCode—35.6%

Reasoning Qwen3.5 122B-A10B leads

Llama 2-7B: 15.7 (#312), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 27.2 (#123)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-7BQwen3.5 122B-A10B
LMArena Hard Prompts10091421
NYT Connections (extended)—51.7%
CritPt—0.9%
Chess Puzzles0%—
Thematic Generalization—51.2%
Mystery Game Puzzles—17%
DTBench—84.3%
LMCA—32.2%
BIG-Bench Hard39.2%—
Epoch Capabilities Index99.06—
HellaSwag77.2%—
LAMBADA73.3%—
PIQA78.8%—
WinoGrande69.2%—

Math Qwen3.5 122B-A10B leads

Llama 2-7B: 30.7 (#233), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 39.1 (#112)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-7BQwen3.5 122B-A10B
LMArena Math10421432
GSM8K16.7%—

Knowledge Qwen3.5 122B-A10B leads

Llama 2-7B: 28.2 (#248), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 38.8 (#142)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-7BQwen3.5 122B-A10B
LMArena Expert10361432
Vectara Hallucination Rate—11.2%
ARC (AI2) Challenge45.9%—
BoolQ77.9%—
MMLU45.8%—
OpenBookQA58.6%—
TriviaQA73.7%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Llama 2-7B: —, Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 39.6 (#57)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-7BQwen3.5 122B-A10B
LMArena Vision—1245
ScienceQA43.1%—

Multilingual Qwen3.5 122B-A10B leads

Llama 2-7B: 23.8 (#293), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 51.6 (#107)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-7BQwen3.5 122B-A10B
LMArena Non-English9731400
LMArena Chinese9731462
LMArena French9701442
LMArena German9781426
LMArena Russian9951400
LMArena Spanish10071424
LMArena Japanese—1367
LMArena Korean—1352

Instruction Following Qwen3.5 122B-A10B leads

Llama 2-7B: 50.8 (#298), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 73.8 (#115)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-7BQwen3.5 122B-A10B
LMArena Instruction Following10061399

Long Context Qwen3.5 122B-A10B leads

Llama 2-7B: 30.4 (#287), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 43.0 (#109)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-7BQwen3.5 122B-A10B
LMArena Longer Query9991410

Writing & Preference Qwen3.5 122B-A10B leads

Llama 2-7B: 28.0 (#298), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 60.0 (#105)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-7BQwen3.5 122B-A10B
LMArena Text10531417
LMArena Creative Writing10331368
LMArena Multi-Turn10291416

Frequently asked questions

Is Llama 2-7B better than Qwen3.5 122B-A10B?

Qwen3.5 122B-A10B is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.1 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.

Is Llama 2-7B or Qwen3.5 122B-A10B better for coding?

Qwen3.5 122B-A10B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.1 versus 29.2 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Llama 2-7B and Qwen3.5 122B-A10B share?

15 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 2-7B has 29 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 122B-A10B has 27.

Related comparisons

Go deeper