Model comparison
Llama 3.1-8B vs Wizardlm 13b
Wizardlm 13b is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.4 to 23.0 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 10 shared benchmarks.
Meta
MicrosoftSummary
- They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3.1-8B scores higher in 3 categories and Wizardlm 13b in 4 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Wizardlm 13b leads 30.2 to 10.2.
Side by side
| Llama 3.1-8B | Wizardlm 13b | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Microsoft |
| Noometry Index | 23.0 | 31.4 |
| Released | 2024-07-23 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 128K | — |
| Max output | 4K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.05 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.08 | — |
| Results tracked | 43 | 10 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Wizardlm 13b leads
Llama 3.1-8B: 20.2 (#340), Wizardlm 13b: 30.1 (#298)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-8B | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1195 | 1035 |
| SciCode | 13.2% | — |
| WeirdML | 1.7% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 32.8% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 40.5% | — |
| HumanEval+ | 62.8% | — |
| MBPP+ | 55.6% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Llama 3.1-8B: 22.5 (#131), Wizardlm 13b: —
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-8B | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 25.8% | — |
| BALROG | 15.1% | — |
Reasoning Wizardlm 13b leads
Llama 3.1-8B: 14.9 (#321), Wizardlm 13b: 19.4 (#259)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-8B | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1175 | 1018 |
| CritPt | 0% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
| DTBench | 50.9% | — |
| LMCA | 5.4% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 116.57 | — |
| PIQA | 81.2% | — |
Math Wizardlm 13b leads
Llama 3.1-8B: 10.2 (#317), Wizardlm 13b: 30.2 (#238)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-8B | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1179 | 1017 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 1.7% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 13.7% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 22.9% | — |
| GSM8K | 82.4% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Llama 3.1-8B: 8.0 (#307), Wizardlm 13b: —
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-8B | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 27% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 40.6% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 24.7% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1144 | — |
| BoolQ | 82.8% | — |
| MMLU | 56.1% | — |
Multilingual Llama 3.1-8B leads
Llama 3.1-8B: 34.0 (#249), Wizardlm 13b: 27.1 (#277)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-8B | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1148 | 1034 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1151 | 1023 |
| LMArena French | 1177 | — |
| LMArena German | 1144 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1061 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1053 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1158 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1169 | — |
Instruction Following Llama 3.1-8B leads
Llama 3.1-8B: 58.9 (#258), Wizardlm 13b: 53.5 (#285)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-8B | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1159 | 1048 |
| IFEval | 74.3% | — |
Long Context Llama 3.1-8B leads
Llama 3.1-8B: 35.8 (#238), Wizardlm 13b: 32.0 (#273)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-8B | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1182 | 1054 |
Writing & Preference Too close to call
Llama 3.1-8B: 29.7 (#290), Wizardlm 13b: 30.5 (#287)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-8B | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1187 | 1077 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1154 | 1091 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1172 | 1047 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 713 | — |
| WildBench | 68.7% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Llama 3.1-8B better than Wizardlm 13b?
Wizardlm 13b is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.4 to 23.0 on the Noometry Index.
Is Llama 3.1-8B or Wizardlm 13b better for coding?
Wizardlm 13b scores higher on coding benchmarks: 30.1 versus 20.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Llama 3.1-8B and Wizardlm 13b share?
10 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.1-8B has 43 scored results on Noometry and Wizardlm 13b has 10.