Model comparison
Amazon Nova Pro vs Qwen3.5 397B-A17B
Qwen3.5 397B-A17B is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.0 to 31.0 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 19 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Amazon Nova Pro scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.5 397B-A17B in 10 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads 53.3 to 27.4.
- Both cost about the same: $0.80 input and $3.20 output per million tokens.
- Amazon Nova Pro accepts more context: 300K tokens versus 262K.
- Qwen3.5 397B-A17B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Amazon Nova Pro | Qwen3.5 397B-A17B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Amazon | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 31.0 | 46.0 |
| Released | 2024-12-03 | 2026-02-01 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 300K | 262K |
| Max output | 10K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.80 | $0.60 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $3.20 | $3.60 |
| Results tracked | 38 | 36 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads
Amazon Nova Pro: 35.1 (#229), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 42.0 (#114)
| Benchmark | Amazon Nova Pro | Qwen3.5 397B-A17B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1270 | 1465 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1400 |
| LiveBench Coding | 38.1% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads
Amazon Nova Pro: 16.7 (#147), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 33.3 (#53)
| Benchmark | Amazon Nova Pro | Qwen3.5 397B-A17B |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 24.9% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 25% | — |
| TheAgentCompany | 1.7% | — |
| τ²-bench Airline | — | 81.5% |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 9.8% |
| τ²-bench Retail | — | 84.4% |
| τ²-bench Telecom | — | 97.8% |
Reasoning Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads
Amazon Nova Pro: 20.0 (#243), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 34.5 (#70)
| Benchmark | Amazon Nova Pro | Qwen3.5 397B-A17B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1246 | 1448 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 123.8 | 146.65 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 73.7% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 58.9% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 13% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 65.1% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 32.6% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 18% |
| DTBench | — | 87.5% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 48.3% | — |
| LMCA | — | 37.9% |
| LiveBench | 43.5% | — |
Math Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads
Amazon Nova Pro: 28.5 (#243), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 46.1 (#73)
| Benchmark | Amazon Nova Pro | Qwen3.5 397B-A17B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1252 | 1454 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 31.2% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 88.9% |
| Omni-MATH | 24.2% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 38% | — |
Knowledge Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads
Amazon Nova Pro: 27.4 (#250), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 53.3 (#58)
| Benchmark | Amazon Nova Pro | Qwen3.5 397B-A17B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1211 | 1462 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 86.4% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 4.4% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 67.3% | — |
| Confabulations | 30.1% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 5.1% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 44.6% | — |
| MMLU | 82% | — |
Multimodal Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads
Amazon Nova Pro: 25.0 (#126), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 40.7 (#44)
| Benchmark | Amazon Nova Pro | Qwen3.5 397B-A17B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 980 | 1263 |
Multilingual Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads
Amazon Nova Pro: 39.7 (#223), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 53.7 (#59)
| Benchmark | Amazon Nova Pro | Qwen3.5 397B-A17B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1234 | 1430 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1244 | 1500 |
| LMArena French | 1271 | 1461 |
| LMArena German | 1243 | 1447 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1200 | 1426 |
| LMArena Korean | 1203 | 1384 |
| LMArena Russian | 1240 | 1429 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1182 | 1441 |
Instruction Following Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads
Amazon Nova Pro: 64.9 (#226), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 75.0 (#77)
| Benchmark | Amazon Nova Pro | Qwen3.5 397B-A17B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1235 | 1424 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 67.1% | — |
| IFEval | 81.5% | — |
Long Context Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads
Amazon Nova Pro: 38.1 (#205), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 44.1 (#74)
| Benchmark | Amazon Nova Pro | Qwen3.5 397B-A17B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1255 | 1442 |
Writing & Preference Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads
Amazon Nova Pro: 43.9 (#226), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 62.3 (#79)
| Benchmark | Amazon Nova Pro | Qwen3.5 397B-A17B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1259 | 1438 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1212 | 1401 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1246 | 1446 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 60.5% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1478 |
| WildBench | 77.7% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 37% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Amazon Nova Pro better than Qwen3.5 397B-A17B?
Qwen3.5 397B-A17B is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.0 to 31.0 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Amazon Nova Pro or Qwen3.5 397B-A17B?
Qwen3.5 397B-A17B is cheaper. It lists at $0.60 per million input tokens and $3.60 per million output tokens; Amazon Nova Pro lists at $0.80 and $3.20.
Is Amazon Nova Pro or Qwen3.5 397B-A17B better for coding?
Qwen3.5 397B-A17B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.0 versus 35.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Amazon Nova Pro does, with 300K tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks do Amazon Nova Pro and Qwen3.5 397B-A17B share?
19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Amazon Nova Pro has 38 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 397B-A17B has 36.