Noometry

Model comparison

Llama 3.1-70B vs Qwen3.5 Max Preview

Qwen3.5 Max Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.3 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

Llama 3.1-70B Meta

29.6

Rank #308 Confirmed

Qwen3.5 Max Preview Alibaba (Qwen)

45.3

Rank #71 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3.1-70B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.5 Max Preview in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads 66.0 to 35.4.
  • Llama 3.1-70B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Llama 3.1-70BQwen3.5 Max Preview
ProviderMetaAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index29.645.3
Released2024-07-23—
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window128K—
Max output4K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.40—
Output $ / M tokens$0.40—
Results tracked3517

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads

Llama 3.1-70B: 30.3 (#296), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 44.0 (#77)

BenchmarkLlama 3.1-70BQwen3.5 Max Preview
LMArena Coding12601487
WeirdML9%—
BigCodeBench Instruct46.1%—
BigCodeBench Complete54.8%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Llama 3.1-70B: 25.1 (#112), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: —

BenchmarkLlama 3.1-70BQwen3.5 Max Preview
TheAgentCompany6.9%—
BALROG27.9%—

Reasoning Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads

Llama 3.1-70B: 21.6 (#220), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 30.8 (#84)

BenchmarkLlama 3.1-70BQwen3.5 Max Preview
LMArena Hard Prompts12411483
DTBench60%—
LMCA14.8%—
Epoch Capabilities Index125.92—

Math Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads

Llama 3.1-70B: 13.5 (#304), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 40.1 (#94)

BenchmarkLlama 3.1-70BQwen3.5 Max Preview
LMArena Math12521474
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20253.6%—
Omni-MATH21%—
MATH Level 536.7%—

Knowledge Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads

Llama 3.1-70B: 24.2 (#269), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 41.8 (#107)

BenchmarkLlama 3.1-70BQwen3.5 Max Preview
LMArena Expert12091489
GPQA Diamond44.2%—
MMLU-Pro65.3%—
GPQA (HELM)42.6%—
MMLU80.1%—

Multilingual Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads

Llama 3.1-70B: 38.8 (#225), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 56.2 (#22)

BenchmarkLlama 3.1-70BQwen3.5 Max Preview
LMArena Non-English12191465
LMArena Chinese12151534
LMArena French12611484
LMArena German12221487
LMArena Japanese11321495
LMArena Korean11401438
LMArena Russian12341471
LMArena Spanish12531470

Instruction Following Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads

Llama 3.1-70B: 65.3 (#223), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 77.0 (#31)

BenchmarkLlama 3.1-70BQwen3.5 Max Preview
LMArena Instruction Following12311467
IFEval82.1%—

Long Context Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads

Llama 3.1-70B: 37.6 (#214), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 45.2 (#45)

BenchmarkLlama 3.1-70BQwen3.5 Max Preview
LMArena Longer Query12411476

Writing & Preference Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads

Llama 3.1-70B: 35.4 (#267), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 66.0 (#41)

BenchmarkLlama 3.1-70BQwen3.5 Max Preview
LMArena Text12611470
LMArena Creative Writing12321464
LMArena Multi-Turn12561478
EQ-Bench Creative Writing784—
WildBench75.8%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Llama 3.1-70B better than Qwen3.5 Max Preview?

Qwen3.5 Max Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.3 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.

Is Llama 3.1-70B or Qwen3.5 Max Preview better for coding?

Qwen3.5 Max Preview scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.0 versus 30.3 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Llama 3.1-70B and Qwen3.5 Max Preview share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.1-70B has 35 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 Max Preview has 17.

Related comparisons

Go deeper