Model comparison
Qwen1.5-32B vs Wizardlm 70b
Wizardlm 70b is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.0 to 30.5 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)
MicrosoftSummary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen1.5-32B scores higher in 6 categories and Wizardlm 70b in 1 category; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
Side by side
| Qwen1.5-32B | Wizardlm 70b | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Microsoft |
| Noometry Index | 30.5 | 33.0 |
| Released | 2024-02-04 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 21 | 12 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
Qwen1.5-32B: 31.7 (#282), Wizardlm 70b: 31.4 (#285)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-32B | Wizardlm 70b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1155 | 1081 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 32.3% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 42% | — |
Reasoning Qwen1.5-32B leads
Qwen1.5-32B: 21.8 (#212), Wizardlm 70b: 20.7 (#234)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-32B | Wizardlm 70b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1130 | 1079 |
Math Too close to call
Qwen1.5-32B: 33.0 (#207), Wizardlm 70b: 32.2 (#218)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-32B | Wizardlm 70b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1155 | 1116 |
Knowledge Not comparable
Qwen1.5-32B: 13.5 (#296), Wizardlm 70b: —
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-32B | Wizardlm 70b |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 30.7% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1126 | — |
| MMLU | 74.4% | — |
Multilingual Qwen1.5-32B leads
Qwen1.5-32B: 31.4 (#259), Wizardlm 70b: 29.6 (#265)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-32B | Wizardlm 70b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1106 | 1078 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1177 | 1052 |
| LMArena German | 1058 | 1083 |
| LMArena Russian | 1073 | 1155 |
| LMArena French | 1101 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1027 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1008 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1089 | — |
Instruction Following Qwen1.5-32B leads
Qwen1.5-32B: 57.7 (#265), Wizardlm 70b: 56.3 (#273)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-32B | Wizardlm 70b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1116 | 1093 |
Long Context Qwen1.5-32B leads
Qwen1.5-32B: 34.7 (#246), Wizardlm 70b: 33.3 (#263)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-32B | Wizardlm 70b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1146 | 1097 |
Writing & Preference Too close to call
Qwen1.5-32B: 34.2 (#271), Wizardlm 70b: 34.8 (#269)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-32B | Wizardlm 70b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1137 | 1120 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1083 | 1149 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1140 | 1108 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Qwen1.5-32B better than Wizardlm 70b?
Wizardlm 70b is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.0 to 30.5 on the Noometry Index.
Is Qwen1.5-32B or Wizardlm 70b better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (31.7 vs 31.4); test both on your own repository before choosing.
How many benchmarks do Qwen1.5-32B and Wizardlm 70b share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen1.5-32B has 21 scored results on Noometry and Wizardlm 70b has 12.