Model comparison
Llama 3-70B vs Qwen1.5-7B
Qwen1.5-7B is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.8 to 28.5 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.
Meta
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3-70B scores higher in 5 categories and Qwen1.5-7B in 3 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen1.5-7B leads 29.0 to 12.0.
Side by side
| Llama 3-70B | Qwen1.5-7B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 28.5 | 30.8 |
| Released | 2024-04-18 | 2024-02-04 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 31 | 13 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Llama 3-70B leads
Llama 3-70B: 35.3 (#215), Qwen1.5-7B: 31.6 (#271)
| Benchmark | Llama 3-70B | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1206 | 1107 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 43.6% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 54.5% | — |
| HumanEval+ | 72% | — |
| MBPP+ | 69% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Llama 3-70B: 20.9 (#132), Qwen1.5-7B: —
| Benchmark | Llama 3-70B | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| Cybench | 5% | — |
Reasoning Qwen1.5-7B leads
Llama 3-70B: 17.4 (#284), Qwen1.5-7B: 19.5 (#237)
| Benchmark | Llama 3-70B | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1195 | 1066 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 35.1% | — |
| DTBench | 54.2% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 122.91 | — |
| ForecastBench | 57.1 | — |
| WinoGrande | 83.5% | — |
Math Qwen1.5-7B leads
Llama 3-70B: 12.0 (#299), Qwen1.5-7B: 29.0 (#222)
| Benchmark | Llama 3-70B | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1218 | 1080 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 4.3% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 22.6% | — |
Knowledge Qwen1.5-7B leads
Llama 3-70B: 20.8 (#272), Qwen1.5-7B: 28.2 (#239)
| Benchmark | Llama 3-70B | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1149 | 1055 |
| MMLU | 79.3% | 62.6% |
| GPQA Diamond | 40.6% | — |
Multilingual Llama 3-70B leads
Llama 3-70B: 33.8 (#246), Qwen1.5-7B: 28.6 (#266)
| Benchmark | Llama 3-70B | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1142 | 1058 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1114 | 1140 |
| LMArena Russian | 1159 | 1006 |
| LMArena French | 1231 | — |
| LMArena German | 1169 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1017 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1017 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1241 | — |
Instruction Following Llama 3-70B leads
Llama 3-70B: 62.8 (#233), Qwen1.5-7B: 54.4 (#276)
| Benchmark | Llama 3-70B | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1194 | 1058 |
Long Context Llama 3-70B leads
Llama 3-70B: 35.6 (#235), Qwen1.5-7B: 33.1 (#261)
| Benchmark | Llama 3-70B | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1174 | 1090 |
Writing & Preference Llama 3-70B leads
Llama 3-70B: 43.0 (#225), Qwen1.5-7B: 29.8 (#288)
| Benchmark | Llama 3-70B | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1221 | 1084 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1210 | 1035 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1223 | 1061 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Llama 3-70B better than Qwen1.5-7B?
Qwen1.5-7B is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.8 to 28.5 on the Noometry Index.
Is Llama 3-70B or Qwen1.5-7B better for coding?
Llama 3-70B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 35.3 versus 31.6 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Llama 3-70B and Qwen1.5-7B share?
13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3-70B has 31 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-7B has 13.