Model comparison
OLMo 2 Furious 13B vs Qwen1.5-7B
Qwen1.5-7B is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.4 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where OLMo 2 Furious 13B leads 42.9 to 29.6.
Side by side
| OLMo 2 Furious 13B | Qwen1.5-7B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 29.7 | 31.4 |
| Released | 2024-12-31 | 2024-02-04 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 12 | 13 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen1.5-7B leads
OLMo 2 Furious 13B: 28.6 (#313), Qwen1.5-7B: 32.2 (#276)
| Benchmark | OLMo 2 Furious 13B | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Coding | 10.4% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1107 |
Reasoning Qwen1.5-7B leads
OLMo 2 Furious 13B: 15.5 (#314), Qwen1.5-7B: 20.4 (#240)
| Benchmark | OLMo 2 Furious 13B | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Reasoning | 16.3% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1065 |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 20.6% | — |
| LiveBench | 22.1% | — |
Math Qwen1.5-7B leads
OLMo 2 Furious 13B: 23.1 (#273), Qwen1.5-7B: 31.4 (#224)
| Benchmark | OLMo 2 Furious 13B | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| Omni-MATH | 15.6% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 13.6% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1080 |
Knowledge Qwen1.5-7B leads
OLMo 2 Furious 13B: 18.3 (#283), Qwen1.5-7B: 28.7 (#243)
| Benchmark | OLMo 2 Furious 13B | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU-Pro | 31% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 31.6% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1055 |
| MMLU | — | 62.6% |
Multilingual Not comparable
OLMo 2 Furious 13B: —, Qwen1.5-7B: 28.5 (#271)
| Benchmark | OLMo 2 Furious 13B | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1058 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1141 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1006 |
Instruction Following OLMo 2 Furious 13B leads
OLMo 2 Furious 13B: 60.9 (#248), Qwen1.5-7B: 54.1 (#281)
| Benchmark | OLMo 2 Furious 13B | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 60.6% | — |
| IFEval | 73% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1058 |
Long Context Not comparable
OLMo 2 Furious 13B: —, Qwen1.5-7B: 33.1 (#266)
| Benchmark | OLMo 2 Furious 13B | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1090 |
Writing & Preference OLMo 2 Furious 13B leads
OLMo 2 Furious 13B: 42.9 (#230), Qwen1.5-7B: 29.6 (#293)
| Benchmark | OLMo 2 Furious 13B | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1083 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1035 |
| WildBench | 68.9% | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1062 |
| LiveBench Language | 11.2% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is OLMo 2 Furious 13B better than Qwen1.5-7B?
Qwen1.5-7B is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.4 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.
Is OLMo 2 Furious 13B or Qwen1.5-7B better for coding?
Qwen1.5-7B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 32.2 versus 28.6 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do OLMo 2 Furious 13B and Qwen1.5-7B share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. OLMo 2 Furious 13B has 12 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-7B has 13.