Model comparison

Llama 3.1-8B vs Qwen1.5 4b Chat

Qwen1.5 4b Chat is the stronger model overall, scoring 28.8 to 23.0 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.

Llama 3.1-8B Meta

23.0

Rank #352 Confirmed

Qwen1.5 4b Chat Alibaba (Qwen)

28.8

Rank #322 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3.1-8B scores higher in 4 categories and Qwen1.5 4b Chat in 4 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Qwen1.5 4b Chat leads 30.4 to 10.2.

Side by side

Llama 3.1-8B and Qwen1.5 4b Chat specifications
Llama 3.1-8BQwen1.5 4b Chat
ProviderMetaAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index23.028.8
Released2024-07-23—
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window128K—
Max output4K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.05—
Output $ / M tokens$0.08—
Results tracked4313

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen1.5 4b Chat leads

Llama 3.1-8B: 20.2 (#340), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 29.1 (#308)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-8BQwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Coding1195999
SciCode13.2%—
WeirdML1.7%—
BigCodeBench Instruct32.8%—
BigCodeBench Complete40.5%—
HumanEval+62.8%—
MBPP+55.6%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Llama 3.1-8B: 22.5 (#131), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-8BQwen1.5 4b Chat
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard25.8%—
BALROG15.1%—

Reasoning Qwen1.5 4b Chat leads

Llama 3.1-8B: 14.9 (#321), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 18.5 (#279)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-8BQwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Hard Prompts1175976
CritPt0%—
Chess Puzzles0%—
DTBench50.9%—
LMCA5.4%—
Epoch Capabilities Index116.57—
PIQA81.2%—

Math Qwen1.5 4b Chat leads

Llama 3.1-8B: 10.2 (#317), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 30.4 (#234)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-8BQwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Math11791026
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20251.7%—
Omni-MATH13.7%—
MATH Level 522.9%—
GSM8K82.4%—

Knowledge Qwen1.5 4b Chat leads

Llama 3.1-8B: 8.0 (#307), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 26.7 (#255)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-8BQwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Expert1144980
GPQA Diamond27%—
MMLU-Pro40.6%—
GPQA (HELM)24.7%—
BoolQ82.8%—
MMLU56.1%—

Multilingual Llama 3.1-8B leads

Llama 3.1-8B: 34.0 (#249), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 24.1 (#290)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-8BQwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Non-English1148979
LMArena Chinese11511024
LMArena German1144902
LMArena Russian1158952
LMArena French1177—
LMArena Japanese1061—
LMArena Korean1053—
LMArena Spanish1169—

Instruction Following Llama 3.1-8B leads

Llama 3.1-8B: 58.9 (#258), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 49.0 (#300)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-8BQwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Instruction Following1159978
IFEval74.3%—

Long Context Llama 3.1-8B leads

Llama 3.1-8B: 35.8 (#238), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 30.1 (#290)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-8BQwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Longer Query1182988

Writing & Preference Llama 3.1-8B leads

Llama 3.1-8B: 29.7 (#290), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 23.8 (#309)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-8BQwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Text1187997
LMArena Creative Writing1154969
LMArena Multi-Turn1172977
EQ-Bench Creative Writing713—
WildBench68.7%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Llama 3.1-8B better than Qwen1.5 4b Chat?

Qwen1.5 4b Chat is the stronger model overall, scoring 28.8 to 23.0 on the Noometry Index.

Is Llama 3.1-8B or Qwen1.5 4b Chat better for coding?

Qwen1.5 4b Chat scores higher on coding benchmarks: 29.1 versus 20.2 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Llama 3.1-8B and Qwen1.5 4b Chat share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.1-8B has 43 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5 4b Chat has 13.

Related comparisons

Go deeper