Model comparison

Llama 3.1-405B vs Qwen1.5 4b Chat

Llama 3.1-405B is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.7 to 28.8 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.

Llama 3.1-405B Meta

30.7

Rank #288 Confirmed

Qwen1.5 4b Chat Alibaba (Qwen)

28.8

Rank #322 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3.1-405B scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen1.5 4b Chat in 2 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in instruction following, where Llama 3.1-405B leads 65.9 to 49.0.

Side by side

Llama 3.1-405B and Qwen1.5 4b Chat specifications
Llama 3.1-405BQwen1.5 4b Chat
ProviderMetaAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index30.728.8
Released2024-07-23—
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window——
Max output——
Input $ / M tokens——
Output $ / M tokens——
Results tracked4213

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

Category by category

Coding Llama 3.1-405B leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 33.1 (#262), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 29.1 (#308)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BQwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Coding1291999
WeirdML21.4%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Llama 3.1-405B: 21.0 (#140), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BQwen1.5 4b Chat
TheAgentCompany7.4%—
Cybench7.5%—

Reasoning Qwen1.5 4b Chat leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 16.8 (#300), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 18.5 (#279)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BQwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Hard Prompts1269976
SimpleBench23%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark45%—
DTBench61.4%—
BIG-Bench Hard82.9%—
Epoch Capabilities Index128.75—
ForecastBench59.9—
HellaSwag89.2%—
PIQA85.9%—
WinoGrande89.2%—

Math Qwen1.5 4b Chat leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 18.4 (#290), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 30.4 (#234)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BQwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Math12811026
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20259.7%—
Omni-MATH24.9%—
MATH Level 549.8%—

Knowledge Llama 3.1-405B leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 30.4 (#227), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 26.7 (#255)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BQwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Expert1243980
GPQA Diamond50.9%—
MMLU-Pro72.3%—
Confabulations17.6%—
GPQA (HELM)52.2%—
ARC (AI2) Challenge95.3%—
MMLU84.5%—
TriviaQA82.7%—

Multilingual Llama 3.1-405B leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 40.7 (#214), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 24.1 (#290)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BQwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Non-English1248979
LMArena Chinese12421024
LMArena German1252902
LMArena Russian1265952
LMArena French1279—
LMArena Japanese1208—
LMArena Korean1184—
LMArena Spanish1260—

Instruction Following Llama 3.1-405B leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 65.9 (#214), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 49.0 (#300)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BQwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Instruction Following1259978
IFEval81.1%—

Long Context Llama 3.1-405B leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 38.4 (#197), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 30.1 (#290)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BQwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Longer Query1266988

Writing & Preference Llama 3.1-405B leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 38.9 (#251), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 23.8 (#309)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BQwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Text1284997
LMArena Creative Writing1262969
LMArena Multi-Turn1297977
EQ-Bench Creative Writing870—
WildBench78.3%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Llama 3.1-405B better than Qwen1.5 4b Chat?

Llama 3.1-405B is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.7 to 28.8 on the Noometry Index.

Is Llama 3.1-405B or Qwen1.5 4b Chat better for coding?

Llama 3.1-405B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 33.1 versus 29.1 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Llama 3.1-405B and Qwen1.5 4b Chat share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.1-405B has 42 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5 4b Chat has 13.

Related comparisons

Go deeper