Model comparison
Llama 3.2 90B vs Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.1 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Meta
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads 33.5 to 10.4.
- Llama 3.2 90B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Llama 3.2 90B | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 27.1 | 38.1 |
| Released | 2024-09-24 | — |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 9 | 14 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Llama 3.2 90B: —, Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 37.9 (#171)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 90B | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | — | 1314 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Llama 3.2 90B: 29.7 (#73), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: —
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 90B | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| BALROG | 27.3% | — |
Reasoning Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads
Llama 3.2 90B: 20.9 (#207), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 24.8 (#139)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 90B | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| EnigmaEval | 0.4% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1299 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 125.5 | — |
Math Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads
Llama 3.2 90B: 10.4 (#302), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 33.5 (#175)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 90B | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 2.6% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1298 |
| MATH Level 5 | 39.4% | — |
Knowledge Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads
Llama 3.2 90B: 21.7 (#269), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 34.9 (#179)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 90B | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 41% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1289 |
| MMLU | 80.3% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Llama 3.2 90B: 24.9 (#119), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: —
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 90B | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1000 | — |
| GeoBench | 52% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Llama 3.2 90B: —, Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 42.1 (#196)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 90B | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1265 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1314 |
| LMArena German | — | 1231 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1207 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1271 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Llama 3.2 90B: —, Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 67.4 (#194)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 90B | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1275 |
Long Context Not comparable
Llama 3.2 90B: —, Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 39.2 (#180)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 90B | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1292 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Llama 3.2 90B: —, Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 49.5 (#186)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 90B | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1299 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1262 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1299 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Llama 3.2 90B better than Qwen2.5 Plus 1127?
Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.1 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index.
How many benchmarks do Llama 3.2 90B and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.2 90B has 9 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 has 14.