Model comparison

Codellama 70b Instruct vs Qwen3.5 27B

Qwen3.5 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.9 to 33.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 4 shared benchmarks.

Codellama 70b Instruct Meta

33.7

Rank #237 Confirmed

Qwen3.5 27B Alibaba (Qwen)

41.9

Rank #127 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. Codellama 70b Instruct scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.5 27B in 5 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in multilingual, where Qwen3.5 27B leads 50.8 to 24.8.

Side by side

Codellama 70b Instruct and Qwen3.5 27B specifications
Codellama 70b InstructQwen3.5 27B
ProviderMetaAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index33.741.9
Released—2026-02-23
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—262K
Max output—66K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.30
Output $ / M tokens—$2.40
Results tracked728

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.5 27B leads

Codellama 70b Instruct: 37.6 (#193), Qwen3.5 27B: 38.9 (#168)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 70b InstructQwen3.5 27B
LMArena WebDev—1358
WeirdML—39.5%
BigCodeBench Instruct40.7%—
LMArena Coding—1427
BigCodeBench Complete49.6%—
ALE-Bench—349.45
HumanEval+65.9%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Codellama 70b Instruct: —, Qwen3.5 27B: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 70b InstructQwen3.5 27B
Vending-Bench 2—201.98

Reasoning Qwen3.5 27B leads

Codellama 70b Instruct: 20.1 (#242), Qwen3.5 27B: 27.5 (#117)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 70b InstructQwen3.5 27B
LMArena Hard Prompts10521414
NYT Connections (extended)—47.9%
Thematic Generalization—45.5%
DTBench—82.4%
LMCA—34%

Math Not comparable

Codellama 70b Instruct: —, Qwen3.5 27B: 38.8 (#127)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 70b InstructQwen3.5 27B
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions—56.7%
LMArena Math—1429

Knowledge Not comparable

Codellama 70b Instruct: —, Qwen3.5 27B: 38.0 (#150)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 70b InstructQwen3.5 27B
Vectara Hallucination Rate—12.1%
LMArena Expert—1428

Multimodal Not comparable

Codellama 70b Instruct: —, Qwen3.5 27B: 39.4 (#59)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 70b InstructQwen3.5 27B
LMArena Vision—1241

Multilingual Qwen3.5 27B leads

Codellama 70b Instruct: 24.8 (#288), Qwen3.5 27B: 50.8 (#115)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 70b InstructQwen3.5 27B
LMArena Non-English9921390
LMArena Chinese—1478
LMArena French—1410
LMArena German—1393
LMArena Japanese—1345
LMArena Korean—1358
LMArena Russian—1390
LMArena Spanish—1407

Instruction Following Qwen3.5 27B leads

Codellama 70b Instruct: 51.9 (#293), Qwen3.5 27B: 73.5 (#119)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 70b InstructQwen3.5 27B
LMArena Instruction Following10241393

Long Context Not comparable

Codellama 70b Instruct: —, Qwen3.5 27B: 43.1 (#106)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 70b InstructQwen3.5 27B
LMArena Longer Query—1413

Writing & Preference Qwen3.5 27B leads

Codellama 70b Instruct: 33.4 (#277), Qwen3.5 27B: 59.3 (#111)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 70b InstructQwen3.5 27B
LMArena Text10571409
LMArena Creative Writing—1362
LMArena Multi-Turn—1410

Frequently asked questions

Is Codellama 70b Instruct better than Qwen3.5 27B?

Qwen3.5 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.9 to 33.7 on the Noometry Index.

Is Codellama 70b Instruct or Qwen3.5 27B better for coding?

Qwen3.5 27B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.9 versus 37.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Codellama 70b Instruct and Qwen3.5 27B share?

4 benchmarks have published results for both models. Codellama 70b Instruct has 7 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 27B has 28.

Related comparisons

Go deeper