Model comparison
Llama 2-7B vs Qwen3.6 27B
Qwen3.6 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.2 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.
Meta
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 2-7B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.6 27B in 5 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.6 27B leads 52.4 to 28.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Chess Puzzles: 0% for Llama 2-7B and 22% for Qwen3.6 27B.
Side by side
| Llama 2-7B | Qwen3.6 27B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 29.1 | 42.2 |
| Released | 2023-07-18 | 2026-04-22 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 262K |
| Max output | — | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.60 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $3.60 |
| Results tracked | 29 | 11 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3.6 27B leads
Llama 2-7B: 29.2 (#307), Qwen3.6 27B: 39.1 (#163)
| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | — | 37.3% |
| LMArena Coding | 1002 | — |
Reasoning Qwen3.6 27B leads
Llama 2-7B: 15.7 (#312), Qwen3.6 27B: 25.0 (#153)
| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | 22% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 99.06 | 146.5 |
| CritPt | — | 0.9% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1009 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 7% |
| DTBench | — | 78.1% |
| LMCA | — | 34.5% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 39.2% | — |
| HellaSwag | 77.2% | — |
| LAMBADA | 73.3% | — |
| PIQA | 78.8% | — |
| WinoGrande | 69.2% | — |
Math Qwen3.6 27B leads
Llama 2-7B: 30.7 (#233), Qwen3.6 27B: 48.5 (#62)
| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 35.1% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 91.1% |
| LMArena Math | 1042 | — |
| GSM8K | 16.7% | — |
Knowledge Qwen3.6 27B leads
Llama 2-7B: 28.2 (#248), Qwen3.6 27B: 52.4 (#63)
| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 85.9% |
| LMArena Expert | 1036 | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 45.9% | — |
| BoolQ | 77.9% | — |
| MMLU | 45.8% | — |
| OpenBookQA | 58.6% | — |
| TriviaQA | 73.7% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Llama 2-7B: —, Qwen3.6 27B: —
| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| ScienceQA | 43.1% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Llama 2-7B: 23.8 (#293), Qwen3.6 27B: —
| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 973 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 973 | — |
| LMArena French | 970 | — |
| LMArena German | 978 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 995 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1007 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Llama 2-7B: 50.8 (#298), Qwen3.6 27B: —
| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1006 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Llama 2-7B: 30.4 (#287), Qwen3.6 27B: —
| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 999 | — |
Writing & Preference Qwen3.6 27B leads
Llama 2-7B: 28.0 (#298), Qwen3.6 27B: 50.3 (#181)
| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1053 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1033 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1026 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1029 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Llama 2-7B better than Qwen3.6 27B?
Qwen3.6 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.2 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.
Is Llama 2-7B or Qwen3.6 27B better for coding?
Qwen3.6 27B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.1 versus 29.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Llama 2-7B and Qwen3.6 27B share?
2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 2-7B has 29 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 27B has 11.