# Llama 2-7B vs Qwen3.8 27B

> Qwen3.8 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.0 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/llama-2-7b-vs-qwen3-8-27b
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 16

## Summary

- They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 2-7B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.8 27B in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen3.8 27B leads 65.8 to 28.0.

## Snapshot

| | Llama 2-7B | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 29.1 | 46.0 |
| Rank | 317 | 68 |
| Context | — | 262K |
| Input $/M | — | $0.04 |
| Output $/M | — | $2.30 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Llama 2-7B: 29.2 (#307)
- Qwen3.8 27B: 50.5 (#44)

| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1002 | 1482 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1593 |
| SciCode | — | 46.6% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Llama 2-7B: —
- Qwen3.8 27B: 32.9 (#57)

| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 47.5% |

## Reasoning

- Llama 2-7B: 15.7 (#312)
- Qwen3.8 27B: 41.0 (#54)

| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1009 | 1460 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 99.06 | 149.38 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 42.4% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 54.5% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 87.5% |
| CritPt | — | 5.4% |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
| DTBench | — | 88% |
| LMCA | — | 41.4% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 45% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 39.2% | — |
| HellaSwag | 77.2% | — |
| LAMBADA | 73.3% | — |
| PIQA | 78.8% | — |
| WinoGrande | 69.2% | — |

## Math

- Llama 2-7B: 30.7 (#233)
- Qwen3.8 27B: 37.1 (#161)

| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1042 | 1456 |
| ProofBench | — | 16% |
| GSM8K | 16.7% | — |

## Knowledge

- Llama 2-7B: 28.2 (#248)
- Qwen3.8 27B: 41.6 (#109)

| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1036 | 1482 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 45.9% | — |
| BoolQ | 77.9% | — |
| MMLU | 45.8% | — |
| OpenBookQA | 58.6% | — |
| TriviaQA | 73.7% | — |

## Multimodal

- Llama 2-7B: —
- Qwen3.8 27B: 41.3 (#37)

| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1271 |
| ScienceQA | 43.1% | — |

## Multilingual

- Llama 2-7B: 23.8 (#293)
- Qwen3.8 27B: 53.7 (#60)

| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 973 | 1430 |
| LMArena Chinese | 973 | 1504 |
| LMArena French | 970 | 1465 |
| LMArena German | 978 | 1438 |
| LMArena Russian | 995 | 1415 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1007 | 1448 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1384 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1393 |

## Instruction Following

- Llama 2-7B: 50.8 (#298)
- Qwen3.8 27B: 75.8 (#53)

| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1006 | 1439 |

## Long Context

- Llama 2-7B: 30.4 (#287)
- Qwen3.8 27B: 44.3 (#70)

| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 999 | 1450 |

## Writing & Preference

- Llama 2-7B: 28.0 (#298)
- Qwen3.8 27B: 65.8 (#43)

| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1053 | 1441 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1033 | 1384 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1029 | 1441 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1671 |

## FAQ

### Is Llama 2-7B better than Qwen3.8 27B?

Qwen3.8 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.0 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Llama 2-7B or Qwen3.8 27B better for coding?

Qwen3.8 27B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.5 versus 29.2 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Llama 2-7B and Qwen3.8 27B share?

16 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 2-7B has 29 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.8 27B has 31.