# Llama 13b vs Qwen1.5-110B

> Qwen1.5-110B is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.6 to 23.9 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/llama-13b-vs-qwen1-5-110b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 8

## Summary

- They share 8 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 13b scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen1.5-110B in 6 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen1.5-110B leads 38.1 to 13.9.

## Snapshot

| | Llama 13b | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 23.9 | 33.6 |
| Rank | 344 | 231 |
| Context | — | — |
| Input $/M | — | — |
| Output $/M | — | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Llama 13b: 20.9 (#332)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 32.4 (#260)

| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 683 | 1184 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 35% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 44.4% |

## Reasoning

- Llama 13b: 13.4 (#327)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 21.7 (#192)

| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 728 | 1168 |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 37.9% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 100.09 | — |
| ForecastBench | — | 57.7 |
| HellaSwag | 79.2% | — |
| LAMBADA | 75.2% | — |
| PIQA | 80.1% | — |
| WinoGrande | 73% | — |

## Math

- Llama 13b: 24.4 (#259)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 31.1 (#199)

| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 838 | 1185 |
| GSM8K | 20.6% | — |

## Knowledge

- Llama 13b: —
- Qwen1.5-110B: 30.7 (#217)

| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | — | 1144 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 52.7% | — |
| BoolQ | 78.7% | — |
| MMLU | 47.7% | — |
| OpenBookQA | 56.4% | — |
| TriviaQA | 77.9% | — |

## Multimodal

- Llama 13b: —
- Qwen1.5-110B: —

| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| ScienceQA | 43.3% | — |

## Multilingual

- Llama 13b: 16.8 (#292)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 33.8 (#245)

| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 819 | 1142 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1206 |
| LMArena French | — | 1150 |
| LMArena German | — | 1123 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1074 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1044 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1118 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1141 |

## Instruction Following

- Llama 13b: 36.9 (#300)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 60.6 (#247)

| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 781 | 1158 |

## Long Context

- Llama 13b: —
- Qwen1.5-110B: 35.0 (#237)

| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1157 |

## Writing & Preference

- Llama 13b: 13.9 (#307)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 38.1 (#250)

| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 834 | 1175 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 794 | 1148 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 753 | 1160 |

## FAQ

### Is Llama 13b better than Qwen1.5-110B?

Qwen1.5-110B is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.6 to 23.9 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Llama 13b or Qwen1.5-110B better for coding?

Qwen1.5-110B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 32.4 versus 20.9 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Llama 13b and Qwen1.5-110B share?

8 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 13b has 21 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-110B has 20.