# Llama 2-7B vs Qwen1.5-72B

> Qwen1.5-72B is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.8 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/llama-2-7b-vs-qwen1-5-72b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 15

## Summary

- They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 2-7B scores higher in 1 category and Qwen1.5-72B in 7 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Llama 2-7B leads 28.2 to 11.5.

## Snapshot

| | Llama 2-7B | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 29.1 | 30.8 |
| Rank | 317 | 285 |
| Context | — | — |
| Input $/M | — | — |
| Output $/M | — | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Llama 2-7B: 29.2 (#307)
- Qwen1.5-72B: 31.9 (#277)

| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1002 | 1165 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 33.2% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 40.3% |
| HumanEval+ | — | 59.1% |
| MBPP+ | — | 61.6% |

## Reasoning

- Llama 2-7B: 15.7 (#312)
- Qwen1.5-72B: 22.2 (#203)

| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1009 | 1148 |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 39.2% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 99.06 | — |
| HellaSwag | 77.2% | — |
| LAMBADA | 73.3% | — |
| PIQA | 78.8% | — |
| WinoGrande | 69.2% | — |

## Math

- Llama 2-7B: 30.7 (#233)
- Qwen1.5-72B: 33.2 (#205)

| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1042 | 1164 |
| GSM8K | 16.7% | — |

## Knowledge

- Llama 2-7B: 28.2 (#248)
- Qwen1.5-72B: 11.5 (#300)

| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1036 | 1136 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 28.8% |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 45.9% | — |
| BoolQ | 77.9% | — |
| MMLU | 45.8% | — |
| OpenBookQA | 58.6% | — |
| TriviaQA | 73.7% | — |

## Multimodal

- Llama 2-7B: —
- Qwen1.5-72B: —

| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| ScienceQA | 43.1% | — |

## Multilingual

- Llama 2-7B: 23.8 (#293)
- Qwen1.5-72B: 33.2 (#253)

| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 973 | 1135 |
| LMArena Chinese | 973 | 1186 |
| LMArena French | 970 | 1159 |
| LMArena German | 978 | 1084 |
| LMArena Russian | 995 | 1104 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1007 | 1110 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1061 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1050 |

## Instruction Following

- Llama 2-7B: 50.8 (#298)
- Qwen1.5-72B: 59.3 (#256)

| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1006 | 1141 |

## Long Context

- Llama 2-7B: 30.4 (#287)
- Qwen1.5-72B: 35.1 (#243)

| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 999 | 1157 |

## Writing & Preference

- Llama 2-7B: 28.0 (#298)
- Qwen1.5-72B: 37.3 (#258)

| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1053 | 1166 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1033 | 1137 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1029 | 1160 |

## FAQ

### Is Llama 2-7B better than Qwen1.5-72B?

Qwen1.5-72B is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.8 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Llama 2-7B or Qwen1.5-72B better for coding?

Qwen1.5-72B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 31.9 versus 29.2 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Llama 2-7B and Qwen1.5-72B share?

15 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 2-7B has 29 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-72B has 22.