Model comparison
Qwen1.5-7B vs Qwen3 8B
Qwen3 8B is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.3 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3 8B leads 36.1 to 28.2.
Side by side
| Qwen1.5-7B | Qwen3 8B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 30.8 | 33.3 |
| Released | 2024-02-04 | 2025-04 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 131K |
| Max output | — | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.18 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.70 |
| Results tracked | 13 | 11 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3 8B leads
Qwen1.5-7B: 31.6 (#271), Qwen3 8B: 33.4 (#245)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | — | 22.6% |
| LMArena Coding | 1107 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Qwen1.5-7B: —, Qwen3 8B: 29.9 (#71)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 42.6% |
Reasoning Qwen1.5-7B leads
Qwen1.5-7B: 19.5 (#237), Qwen3 8B: 16.1 (#299)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | — | 0% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 5% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1066 | — |
| DTBench | — | 59.7% |
| LMCA | — | 8.8% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 136.17 |
Math Qwen3 8B leads
Qwen1.5-7B: 29.0 (#222), Qwen3 8B: 33.3 (#176)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 56.1% |
| LMArena Math | 1080 | — |
Knowledge Qwen3 8B leads
Qwen1.5-7B: 28.2 (#239), Qwen3 8B: 36.1 (#164)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 56.8% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 4.8% |
| LMArena Expert | 1055 | — |
| MMLU | 62.6% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Qwen1.5-7B: 28.6 (#266), Qwen3 8B: —
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1058 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1140 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1006 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Qwen1.5-7B: 54.4 (#276), Qwen3 8B: —
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1058 | — |
Long Context Qwen3 8B leads
Qwen1.5-7B: 33.1 (#261), Qwen3 8B: 37.8 (#205)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 62.1% |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1090 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Qwen1.5-7B: 29.8 (#288), Qwen3 8B: —
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1084 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1035 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1061 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Qwen1.5-7B better than Qwen3 8B?
Qwen3 8B is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.3 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is Qwen1.5-7B or Qwen3 8B better for coding?
Qwen3 8B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 33.4 versus 31.6 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Qwen1.5-7B and Qwen3 8B share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen1.5-7B has 13 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 8B has 11.