Noometry

Model comparison

ERNIE 5.0 0110 vs Qwen3.5-Flash

Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.3 to 41.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

ERNIE 5.0 0110 Baidu

41.2

Rank #129 Confirmed

Qwen3.5-Flash Alibaba (Qwen)

42.3

Rank #105 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. ERNIE 5.0 0110 scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen3.5-Flash in 2 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.5-Flash leads 32.9 to 16.3.

Side by side

ERNIE 5.0 0110Qwen3.5-Flash
ProviderBaiduAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index41.242.3
Released—2026-02-23
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window—1M
Max output—66K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.10
Output $ / M tokens—$0.40
Results tracked2032

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

Category by category

Coding ERNIE 5.0 0110 leads

ERNIE 5.0 0110: 42.3 (#94), Qwen3.5-Flash: 33.9 (#234)

BenchmarkERNIE 5.0 0110Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Coding14551412
LMArena WebDev—1243
ALE-Bench—221.8

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

ERNIE 5.0 0110: —, Qwen3.5-Flash: —

BenchmarkERNIE 5.0 0110Qwen3.5-Flash
Vending-Bench 2—462.69

Reasoning Qwen3.5-Flash leads

ERNIE 5.0 0110: 16.3 (#296), Qwen3.5-Flash: 32.9 (#63)

BenchmarkERNIE 5.0 0110Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Hard Prompts14461404
NYT Connections (extended)10.3%—
Chess Puzzles—21%
Thematic Generalization41.7%—
Mystery Game Puzzles—20%
DTBench—82.9%
LMCA—29.1%
Epoch Capabilities Index—143.98

Math Too close to call

ERNIE 5.0 0110: 36.5 (#111), Qwen3.5-Flash: 36.3 (#117)

BenchmarkERNIE 5.0 0110Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Math14371407
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—18.2%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—84.4%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—6.2%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—0%

Knowledge Qwen3.5-Flash leads

ERNIE 5.0 0110: 39.2 (#125), Qwen3.5-Flash: 43.2 (#84)

BenchmarkERNIE 5.0 0110Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Expert14271408
GPQA Diamond—82.3%
SimpleQA Verified—20.3%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—10.5%

Multimodal Not comparable

ERNIE 5.0 0110: 39.1 (#49), Qwen3.5-Flash: —

BenchmarkERNIE 5.0 0110Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Vision1248—

Multilingual ERNIE 5.0 0110 leads

ERNIE 5.0 0110: 54.3 (#47), Qwen3.5-Flash: 50.7 (#116)

BenchmarkERNIE 5.0 0110Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Non-English14361385
LMArena Chinese15121446
LMArena French14661412
LMArena German14621389
LMArena Japanese13831369
LMArena Korean14061344
LMArena Russian14461379
LMArena Spanish14731399

Instruction Following ERNIE 5.0 0110 leads

ERNIE 5.0 0110: 74.7 (#88), Qwen3.5-Flash: 72.8 (#133)

BenchmarkERNIE 5.0 0110Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Instruction Following14131374

Long Context Too close to call

ERNIE 5.0 0110: 43.4 (#90), Qwen3.5-Flash: 42.4 (#119)

BenchmarkERNIE 5.0 0110Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Longer Query14221392

Writing & Preference ERNIE 5.0 0110 leads

ERNIE 5.0 0110: 63.4 (#64), Qwen3.5-Flash: 58.2 (#117)

BenchmarkERNIE 5.0 0110Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text14451397
LMArena Creative Writing14261343
LMArena Multi-Turn14331393

Frequently asked questions

Is ERNIE 5.0 0110 better than Qwen3.5-Flash?

Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.3 to 41.2 on the Noometry Index.

Is ERNIE 5.0 0110 or Qwen3.5-Flash better for coding?

ERNIE 5.0 0110 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.3 versus 33.9 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do ERNIE 5.0 0110 and Qwen3.5-Flash share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. ERNIE 5.0 0110 has 20 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5-Flash has 32.

Related comparisons

Go deeper