# Granite 3.1 2b Instruct vs Qwen2.5-Max

> Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.7 to 33.2 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/granite-3-1-2b-instruct-vs-qwen2-5-max
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 12

## Summary

- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Granite 3.1 2b Instruct scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen2.5-Max in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen2.5-Max leads 55.4 to 34.1.
- Granite 3.1 2b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | IBM | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 33.2 | 40.7 |
| Rank | 247 | 146 |
| Context | — | — |
| Input $/M | — | — |
| Output $/M | — | — |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 33.4 (#257)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 41.8 (#117)

| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1149 | 1359 |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 64.4% |

## Reasoning

- Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 22.0 (#209)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 25.6 (#147)

| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1138 | 1360 |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 51.4% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 67.9% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 132.53 |
| LiveBench | — | 62.3% |

## Math

- Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 33.1 (#206)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 36.9 (#162)

| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1159 | 1369 |
| LiveBench Math | — | 58.4% |

## Knowledge

- Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 30.8 (#224)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 35.3 (#186)

| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1131 | 1337 |
| Confabulations | — | 21.8% |

## Multilingual

- Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 29.1 (#269)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 48.1 (#146)

| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1068 | 1352 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1139 | 1382 |
| LMArena Russian | 1063 | 1353 |
| LMArena French | — | 1396 |
| LMArena German | — | 1350 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1300 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1304 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1377 |

## Instruction Following

- Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 57.7 (#264)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 71.3 (#152)

| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1116 | 1335 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 75.3% |

## Long Context

- Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 35.0 (#244)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 41.4 (#142)

| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1155 | 1358 |

## Writing & Preference

- Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 34.1 (#274)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 55.4 (#146)

| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1127 | 1367 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1116 | 1339 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1099 | 1364 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 72.9% |
| LiveBench Language | — | 56.3% |

## FAQ

### Is Granite 3.1 2b Instruct better than Qwen2.5-Max?

Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.7 to 33.2 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Granite 3.1 2b Instruct or Qwen2.5-Max better for coding?

Qwen2.5-Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.8 versus 33.4 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Granite 3.1 2b Instruct and Qwen2.5-Max share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 3.1 2b Instruct has 12 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Max has 27.