# Llama 2-13B vs Qwen3.7 Plus

> Qwen3.7 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.0 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/llama-2-13b-vs-qwen3-7-plus
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 20

## Summary

- They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 2-13B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.7 Plus in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen3.7 Plus leads 64.5 to 30.0.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 42.2% for Llama 2-13B and 84% for Qwen3.7 Plus.
- Llama 2-13B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Llama 2-13B | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 29.1 | 45.0 |
| Rank | 304 | 66 |
| Context | — | 1M |
| Input $/M | — | $0.40 |
| Output $/M | — | $1.60 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Llama 2-13B: 30.4 (#287)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 36.1 (#200)

| Benchmark | Llama 2-13B | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1062 | 1473 |
| FrontierCode | — | 10.2% |
| SciCode | — | 45.5% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Llama 2-13B: —
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 21.2 (#130)

| Benchmark | Llama 2-13B | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| OSWorld 2.0 | — | 2.8% |

## Reasoning

- Llama 2-13B: 12.3 (#333)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 38.4 (#54)

| Benchmark | Llama 2-13B | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | 24% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1051 | 1460 |
| DTBench | 42.2% | 84% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 105.8 | 147.39 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 74.8% |
| CritPt | — | 9.1% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 17% |
| LMCA | — | 37.6% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 58.2% | — |
| HellaSwag | 80.7% | — |
| LAMBADA | 76.5% | — |
| PIQA | 80.8% | — |
| WinoGrande | 72.8% | — |

## Math

- Llama 2-13B: 28.7 (#226)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 49.3 (#47)

| Benchmark | Llama 2-13B | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1065 | 1467 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 34.4% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 93.3% |
| GSM8K | 36.9% | — |

## Knowledge

- Llama 2-13B: 27.5 (#244)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 54.9 (#46)

| Benchmark | Llama 2-13B | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1030 | 1467 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 87.9% |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 60.3% | — |
| BoolQ | 82.4% | — |
| MMLU | 55.6% | — |
| OpenBookQA | 57% | — |
| TriviaQA | 79.6% | — |

## Multimodal

- Llama 2-13B: —
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 41.2 (#30)

| Benchmark | Llama 2-13B | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1281 |
| LMArena Document | — | 1444 |
| ScienceQA | 55.8% | — |

## Multilingual

- Llama 2-13B: 26.7 (#274)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 55.0 (#36)

| Benchmark | Llama 2-13B | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1024 | 1445 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1001 | 1510 |
| LMArena French | 1043 | 1471 |
| LMArena German | 1009 | 1471 |
| LMArena Japanese | 894 | 1411 |
| LMArena Korean | 953 | 1416 |
| LMArena Russian | 1055 | 1457 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1086 | 1453 |

## Instruction Following

- Llama 2-13B: 53.5 (#282)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 75.9 (#49)

| Benchmark | Llama 2-13B | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1046 | 1439 |

## Long Context

- Llama 2-13B: 32.3 (#264)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 44.5 (#61)

| Benchmark | Llama 2-13B | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1064 | 1454 |

## Writing & Preference

- Llama 2-13B: 30.0 (#284)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 64.5 (#54)

| Benchmark | Llama 2-13B | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1085 | 1454 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1047 | 1439 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1050 | 1459 |

## FAQ

### Is Llama 2-13B better than Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.0 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Llama 2-13B or Qwen3.7 Plus better for coding?

Qwen3.7 Plus scores higher on coding benchmarks: 36.1 versus 30.4 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Llama 2-13B and Qwen3.7 Plus share?

20 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 2-13B has 32 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Plus has 32.