Model comparison

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct vs Qwen2.5-Max

Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.1 to 28.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct Alibaba (Qwen)

28.6

Rank #314 Confirmed

Qwen2.5-Max Alibaba (Qwen)

40.1

Rank #142 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Qwen2.5 7B Instruct scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen2.5-Max in 6 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Qwen2.5-Max leads 34.3 to 11.8.
  • Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct and Qwen2.5-Max specifications
Qwen2.5 7B InstructQwen2.5-Max
ProviderAlibaba (Qwen)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index28.640.1
Released2024-092025-01-25
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window131K—
Max output8K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.17—
Output $ / M tokens$0.70—
Results tracked1527

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Qwen2.5-Max leads

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 35.9 (#204), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.2 (#118)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 7B InstructQwen2.5-Max
BigCodeBench Instruct37.6%—
LiveBench Coding—64.4%
LMArena Coding—1359
BigCodeBench Complete46.1%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 23.5 (#117), Qwen2.5-Max: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 7B InstructQwen2.5-Max
BALROG7.8%—

Reasoning Qwen2.5-Max leads

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 14.3 (#317), Qwen2.5-Max: 24.6 (#144)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 7B InstructQwen2.5-Max
Epoch Capabilities Index118.44132.54
Chess Puzzles0%—
LiveBench Reasoning—51.4%
LMArena Hard Prompts—1360
DTBench47.7%—
LiveBench Data Analysis—67.9%
LMCA6.4%—
LiveBench—62.3%

Math Qwen2.5-Max leads

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 11.8 (#300), Qwen2.5-Max: 34.3 (#162)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 7B InstructQwen2.5-Max
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20252.5%—
Omni-MATH29.4%—
LiveBench Math—58.4%
LMArena Math—1369

Knowledge Qwen2.5-Max leads

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 17.0 (#281), Qwen2.5-Max: 34.8 (#181)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 7B InstructQwen2.5-Max
GPQA Diamond35.5%—
MMLU-Pro53.9%—
Confabulations—21.8%
GPQA (HELM)34.1%—
LMArena Expert—1337
MMLU72.9%—

Multilingual Not comparable

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —, Qwen2.5-Max: 48.3 (#140)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 7B InstructQwen2.5-Max
LMArena Non-English—1352
LMArena Chinese—1382
LMArena French—1396
LMArena German—1350
LMArena Japanese—1299
LMArena Korean—1304
LMArena Russian—1353
LMArena Spanish—1377

Instruction Following Qwen2.5-Max leads

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 63.4 (#226), Qwen2.5-Max: 71.5 (#147)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 7B InstructQwen2.5-Max
LiveBench Instruction Following—75.3%
IFEval74.1%—
LMArena Instruction Following—1335

Long Context Not comparable

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —, Qwen2.5-Max: 41.3 (#137)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 7B InstructQwen2.5-Max
LMArena Longer Query—1358

Writing & Preference Qwen2.5-Max leads

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 48.8 (#194), Qwen2.5-Max: 55.6 (#141)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 7B InstructQwen2.5-Max
LMArena Text—1367
LMArena Creative Writing—1339
Short-Story Creative Writing—72.9%
WildBench73.1%—
LMArena Multi-Turn—1364
LiveBench Language—56.3%

Frequently asked questions

Is Qwen2.5 7B Instruct better than Qwen2.5-Max?

Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.1 to 28.6 on the Noometry Index.

Is Qwen2.5 7B Instruct or Qwen2.5-Max better for coding?

Qwen2.5-Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.2 versus 35.9 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Qwen2.5 7B Instruct and Qwen2.5-Max share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has 15 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Max has 27.

Related comparisons

Go deeper