Model comparison
ERNIE 5.1 vs Qwen1.5 4b Chat
ERNIE 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 28.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.
Baidu
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. ERNIE 5.1 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen1.5 4b Chat in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where ERNIE 5.1 leads 65.1 to 23.8.
- Qwen1.5 4b Chat has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| ERNIE 5.1 | Qwen1.5 4b Chat | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Baidu | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 43.8 | 28.8 |
| Released | — | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 19 | 13 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding ERNIE 5.1 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 44.0 (#76), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 29.1 (#308)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1488 | 999 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
ERNIE 5.1: —, Qwen1.5 4b Chat: —
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Search | 1227 | — |
Reasoning ERNIE 5.1 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 21.9 (#211), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 18.5 (#279)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1481 | 976 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 23.4% | — |
Math ERNIE 5.1 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 40.3 (#92), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 30.4 (#234)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1481 | 1026 |
Knowledge ERNIE 5.1 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 41.9 (#102), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 26.7 (#255)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1492 | 980 |
Multilingual ERNIE 5.1 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 55.5 (#29), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 24.1 (#290)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1454 | 979 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1508 | 1024 |
| LMArena German | 1470 | 902 |
| LMArena Russian | 1459 | 952 |
| LMArena French | 1488 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1422 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1427 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1473 | — |
Instruction Following ERNIE 5.1 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 76.7 (#37), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 49.0 (#300)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1460 | 978 |
Long Context ERNIE 5.1 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 44.7 (#59), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 30.1 (#290)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1462 | 988 |
Writing & Preference ERNIE 5.1 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 65.1 (#52), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 23.8 (#309)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1468 | 997 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1441 | 969 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1471 | 977 |
Frequently asked questions
Is ERNIE 5.1 better than Qwen1.5 4b Chat?
ERNIE 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 28.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is ERNIE 5.1 or Qwen1.5 4b Chat better for coding?
ERNIE 5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.0 versus 29.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do ERNIE 5.1 and Qwen1.5 4b Chat share?
13 benchmarks have published results for both models. ERNIE 5.1 has 19 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5 4b Chat has 13.