Model comparison

Llama 2-7B vs Llama 3.1-405B

Llama 3.1-405B is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.7 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 23 shared benchmarks.

Llama 2-7B Meta

29.1

Rank #317 Confirmed

Llama 3.1-405B Meta

30.7

Rank #288 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 23 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 2-7B scores higher in 1 category and Llama 3.1-405B in 7 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in multilingual, where Llama 3.1-405B leads 40.7 to 23.8.

Side by side

Llama 2-7B and Llama 3.1-405B specifications
Llama 2-7BLlama 3.1-405B
ProviderMetaMeta
Noometry Index29.130.7
Released2023-07-182024-07-23
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window——
Max output——
Input $ / M tokens——
Output $ / M tokens——
Results tracked2942

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

Category by category

Coding Llama 3.1-405B leads

Llama 2-7B: 29.2 (#307), Llama 3.1-405B: 33.1 (#262)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-7BLlama 3.1-405B
LMArena Coding10021291
WeirdML—21.4%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Llama 2-7B: —, Llama 3.1-405B: 21.0 (#140)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-7BLlama 3.1-405B
TheAgentCompany—7.4%
Cybench—7.5%

Reasoning Llama 3.1-405B leads

Llama 2-7B: 15.7 (#312), Llama 3.1-405B: 16.8 (#300)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-7BLlama 3.1-405B
LMArena Hard Prompts10091269
BIG-Bench Hard39.2%82.9%
Epoch Capabilities Index99.06128.75
HellaSwag77.2%89.2%
PIQA78.8%85.9%
WinoGrande69.2%89.2%
SimpleBench—23%
Kagi LLM Benchmark—45%
Chess Puzzles0%—
DTBench—61.4%
ForecastBench—59.9
LAMBADA73.3%—

Math Llama 2-7B leads

Llama 2-7B: 30.7 (#233), Llama 3.1-405B: 18.4 (#290)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-7BLlama 3.1-405B
LMArena Math10421281
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—9.7%
Omni-MATH—24.9%
MATH Level 5—49.8%
GSM8K16.7%—

Knowledge Llama 3.1-405B leads

Llama 2-7B: 28.2 (#248), Llama 3.1-405B: 30.4 (#227)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-7BLlama 3.1-405B
LMArena Expert10361243
ARC (AI2) Challenge45.9%95.3%
MMLU45.8%84.5%
TriviaQA73.7%82.7%
GPQA Diamond—50.9%
MMLU-Pro—72.3%
Confabulations—17.6%
GPQA (HELM)—52.2%
BoolQ77.9%—
OpenBookQA58.6%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Llama 2-7B: —, Llama 3.1-405B: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-7BLlama 3.1-405B
ScienceQA43.1%—

Multilingual Llama 3.1-405B leads

Llama 2-7B: 23.8 (#293), Llama 3.1-405B: 40.7 (#214)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-7BLlama 3.1-405B
LMArena Non-English9731248
LMArena Chinese9731242
LMArena French9701279
LMArena German9781252
LMArena Russian9951265
LMArena Spanish10071260
LMArena Japanese—1208
LMArena Korean—1184

Instruction Following Llama 3.1-405B leads

Llama 2-7B: 50.8 (#298), Llama 3.1-405B: 65.9 (#214)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-7BLlama 3.1-405B
LMArena Instruction Following10061259
IFEval—81.1%

Long Context Llama 3.1-405B leads

Llama 2-7B: 30.4 (#287), Llama 3.1-405B: 38.4 (#197)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-7BLlama 3.1-405B
LMArena Longer Query9991266

Writing & Preference Llama 3.1-405B leads

Llama 2-7B: 28.0 (#298), Llama 3.1-405B: 38.9 (#251)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-7BLlama 3.1-405B
LMArena Text10531284
LMArena Creative Writing10331262
LMArena Multi-Turn10291297
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—870
WildBench—78.3%

Frequently asked questions

Is Llama 2-7B better than Llama 3.1-405B?

Llama 3.1-405B is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.7 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.

Is Llama 2-7B or Llama 3.1-405B better for coding?

Llama 3.1-405B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 33.1 versus 29.2 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Llama 2-7B and Llama 3.1-405B share?

23 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 2-7B has 29 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.1-405B has 42.

Related comparisons

Go deeper