Model comparison
OLMo 2 Furious 13B vs Qwen2.5-Max
Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.7 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 7 shared benchmarks.
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 7 benchmarks with published results for both. OLMo 2 Furious 13B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen2.5-Max in 6 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen2.5-Max leads 35.3 to 18.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is LiveBench Coding: 10.4% for OLMo 2 Furious 13B and 64.4% for Qwen2.5-Max.
- OLMo 2 Furious 13B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| OLMo 2 Furious 13B | Qwen2.5-Max | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 29.7 | 40.7 |
| Released | 2024-12-31 | 2025-01-25 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 12 | 27 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen2.5-Max leads
OLMo 2 Furious 13B: 28.6 (#313), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.8 (#117)
| Benchmark | OLMo 2 Furious 13B | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Coding | 10.4% | 64.4% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1359 |
Reasoning Qwen2.5-Max leads
OLMo 2 Furious 13B: 15.5 (#314), Qwen2.5-Max: 25.6 (#147)
| Benchmark | OLMo 2 Furious 13B | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Reasoning | 16.3% | 51.4% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 20.6% | 67.9% |
| LiveBench | 22.1% | 62.3% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1360 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 132.53 |
Math Qwen2.5-Max leads
OLMo 2 Furious 13B: 23.1 (#273), Qwen2.5-Max: 36.9 (#162)
| Benchmark | OLMo 2 Furious 13B | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Math | 13.6% | 58.4% |
| Omni-MATH | 15.6% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1369 |
Knowledge Qwen2.5-Max leads
OLMo 2 Furious 13B: 18.3 (#283), Qwen2.5-Max: 35.3 (#186)
| Benchmark | OLMo 2 Furious 13B | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU-Pro | 31% | — |
| Confabulations | — | 21.8% |
| GPQA (HELM) | 31.6% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1337 |
Multilingual Not comparable
OLMo 2 Furious 13B: —, Qwen2.5-Max: 48.1 (#146)
| Benchmark | OLMo 2 Furious 13B | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1352 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1382 |
| LMArena French | — | 1396 |
| LMArena German | — | 1350 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1300 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1304 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1353 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1377 |
Instruction Following Qwen2.5-Max leads
OLMo 2 Furious 13B: 60.9 (#248), Qwen2.5-Max: 71.3 (#152)
| Benchmark | OLMo 2 Furious 13B | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 60.6% | 75.3% |
| IFEval | 73% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1335 |
Long Context Not comparable
OLMo 2 Furious 13B: —, Qwen2.5-Max: 41.4 (#142)
| Benchmark | OLMo 2 Furious 13B | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1358 |
Writing & Preference Qwen2.5-Max leads
OLMo 2 Furious 13B: 42.9 (#230), Qwen2.5-Max: 55.4 (#146)
| Benchmark | OLMo 2 Furious 13B | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Language | 11.2% | 56.3% |
| LMArena Text | — | 1367 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1339 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 72.9% |
| WildBench | 68.9% | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1364 |
Frequently asked questions
Is OLMo 2 Furious 13B better than Qwen2.5-Max?
Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.7 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.
Is OLMo 2 Furious 13B or Qwen2.5-Max better for coding?
Qwen2.5-Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.8 versus 28.6 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do OLMo 2 Furious 13B and Qwen2.5-Max share?
7 benchmarks have published results for both models. OLMo 2 Furious 13B has 12 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Max has 27.