Model comparison
Qwen1.5 4b Chat vs Qwen1.5-72B
Qwen1.5-72B is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.8 to 28.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen1.5 4b Chat scores higher in 1 category and Qwen1.5-72B in 7 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen1.5 4b Chat leads 26.7 to 11.5.
Side by side
| Qwen1.5 4b Chat | Qwen1.5-72B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 28.8 | 30.8 |
| Released | — | 2024-02-04 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 13 | 22 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen1.5-72B leads
Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 29.1 (#308), Qwen1.5-72B: 31.9 (#277)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5 4b Chat | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 999 | 1165 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 33.2% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 40.3% |
| HumanEval+ | — | 59.1% |
| MBPP+ | — | 61.6% |
Reasoning Qwen1.5-72B leads
Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 18.5 (#279), Qwen1.5-72B: 22.2 (#203)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5 4b Chat | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 976 | 1148 |
Math Qwen1.5-72B leads
Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 30.4 (#234), Qwen1.5-72B: 33.2 (#205)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5 4b Chat | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1026 | 1164 |
Knowledge Qwen1.5 4b Chat leads
Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 26.7 (#255), Qwen1.5-72B: 11.5 (#300)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5 4b Chat | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 980 | 1136 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 28.8% |
Multilingual Qwen1.5-72B leads
Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 24.1 (#290), Qwen1.5-72B: 33.2 (#253)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5 4b Chat | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 979 | 1135 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1024 | 1186 |
| LMArena German | 902 | 1084 |
| LMArena Russian | 952 | 1104 |
| LMArena French | — | 1159 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1061 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1050 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1110 |
Instruction Following Qwen1.5-72B leads
Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 49.0 (#300), Qwen1.5-72B: 59.3 (#256)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5 4b Chat | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 978 | 1141 |
Long Context Qwen1.5-72B leads
Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 30.1 (#290), Qwen1.5-72B: 35.1 (#243)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5 4b Chat | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 988 | 1157 |
Writing & Preference Qwen1.5-72B leads
Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 23.8 (#309), Qwen1.5-72B: 37.3 (#258)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5 4b Chat | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 997 | 1166 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 969 | 1137 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 977 | 1160 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Qwen1.5 4b Chat better than Qwen1.5-72B?
Qwen1.5-72B is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.8 to 28.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is Qwen1.5 4b Chat or Qwen1.5-72B better for coding?
Qwen1.5-72B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 31.9 versus 29.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Qwen1.5 4b Chat and Qwen1.5-72B share?
13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen1.5 4b Chat has 13 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-72B has 22.