Model comparison
Amazon Nova Pro vs Qwen3.5-Flash
Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.5 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 1 category and Qwen3.5-Flash in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.5-Flash leads 43.2 to 27.4.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Vectara Hallucination Rate: 5.1% for Amazon Nova Pro and 10.5% for Qwen3.5-Flash.
- Qwen3.5-Flash is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $0.80 / $3.20 for Amazon Nova Pro.
- Qwen3.5-Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 300K.
Side by side
| Amazon Nova Pro | Qwen3.5-Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Amazon | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 31.0 | 42.5 |
| Released | 2024-12-03 | 2026-02-23 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 300K | 1M |
| Max output | 10K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.80 | $0.10 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $3.20 | $0.40 |
| Results tracked | 38 | 32 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
Amazon Nova Pro: 35.1 (#229), Qwen3.5-Flash: 34.2 (#242)
| Benchmark | Amazon Nova Pro | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1270 | 1412 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1244 |
| LiveBench Coding | 38.1% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 221.8 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Amazon Nova Pro: 16.7 (#147), Qwen3.5-Flash: —
| Benchmark | Amazon Nova Pro | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 25% | — |
| TheAgentCompany | 1.7% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 462.69 |
Reasoning Qwen3.5-Flash leads
Amazon Nova Pro: 20.0 (#243), Qwen3.5-Flash: 33.7 (#72)
| Benchmark | Amazon Nova Pro | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1246 | 1403 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 123.8 | 143.98 |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 21% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 32.6% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 20% |
| DTBench | — | 82.9% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 48.3% | — |
| LMCA | — | 29.1% |
| LiveBench | 43.5% | — |
Math Qwen3.5-Flash leads
Amazon Nova Pro: 28.5 (#243), Qwen3.5-Flash: 37.4 (#158)
| Benchmark | Amazon Nova Pro | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1252 | 1407 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 18.2% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 84.4% |
| Omni-MATH | 24.2% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 38% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 6.2% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 0% |
Knowledge Qwen3.5-Flash leads
Amazon Nova Pro: 27.4 (#250), Qwen3.5-Flash: 43.2 (#93)
| Benchmark | Amazon Nova Pro | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 5.1% | 10.5% |
| LMArena Expert | 1211 | 1407 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 82.3% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 4.4% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 20.3% |
| MMLU-Pro | 67.3% | — |
| Confabulations | 30.1% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 44.6% | — |
| MMLU | 82% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Amazon Nova Pro: 25.0 (#126), Qwen3.5-Flash: —
| Benchmark | Amazon Nova Pro | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 980 | — |
Multilingual Qwen3.5-Flash leads
Amazon Nova Pro: 39.7 (#223), Qwen3.5-Flash: 50.5 (#121)
| Benchmark | Amazon Nova Pro | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1234 | 1385 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1244 | 1446 |
| LMArena French | 1271 | 1412 |
| LMArena German | 1243 | 1390 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1200 | 1368 |
| LMArena Korean | 1203 | 1344 |
| LMArena Russian | 1240 | 1379 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1182 | 1400 |
Instruction Following Qwen3.5-Flash leads
Amazon Nova Pro: 64.9 (#226), Qwen3.5-Flash: 72.6 (#139)
| Benchmark | Amazon Nova Pro | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1235 | 1374 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 67.1% | — |
| IFEval | 81.5% | — |
Long Context Qwen3.5-Flash leads
Amazon Nova Pro: 38.1 (#205), Qwen3.5-Flash: 42.4 (#124)
| Benchmark | Amazon Nova Pro | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1255 | 1392 |
Writing & Preference Qwen3.5-Flash leads
Amazon Nova Pro: 43.9 (#226), Qwen3.5-Flash: 57.9 (#122)
| Benchmark | Amazon Nova Pro | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1259 | 1397 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1212 | 1343 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1246 | 1393 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 60.5% | — |
| WildBench | 77.7% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 37% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Amazon Nova Pro better than Qwen3.5-Flash?
Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.5 to 31.0 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Amazon Nova Pro or Qwen3.5-Flash?
Qwen3.5-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Amazon Nova Pro lists at $0.80 and $3.20.
Is Amazon Nova Pro or Qwen3.5-Flash better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (35.1 vs 34.2); test both on your own repository before choosing.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3.5-Flash does, with 1M tokens against 300K.
How many benchmarks do Amazon Nova Pro and Qwen3.5-Flash share?
19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Amazon Nova Pro has 38 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5-Flash has 32.