Model comparison
ERNIE 5.1 vs Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
ERNIE 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.
Baidu
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. ERNIE 5.1 scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where ERNIE 5.1 leads 65.1 to 49.4.
Side by side
| ERNIE 5.1 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Baidu | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 43.8 | 38.8 |
| Released | — | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 19 | 14 |
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), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 38.5 (#175)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1488 | 1314 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
ERNIE 5.1: —, Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: —
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Search | 1227 | — |
Reasoning Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 21.9 (#211), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 25.9 (#141)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1481 | 1299 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 23.4% | — |
Math ERNIE 5.1 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 40.3 (#92), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 36.1 (#174)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1481 | 1298 |
Knowledge ERNIE 5.1 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 41.9 (#102), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 35.5 (#183)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1492 | 1289 |
Multilingual ERNIE 5.1 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 55.5 (#29), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 41.9 (#201)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1454 | 1265 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1508 | 1314 |
| LMArena German | 1470 | 1231 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1422 | 1207 |
| LMArena Russian | 1459 | 1271 |
| LMArena French | 1488 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1427 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1473 | — |
Instruction Following ERNIE 5.1 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 76.7 (#37), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 67.2 (#199)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1460 | 1275 |
Long Context ERNIE 5.1 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 44.7 (#59), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 39.2 (#184)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1462 | 1292 |
Writing & Preference ERNIE 5.1 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 65.1 (#52), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 49.4 (#192)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1468 | 1299 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1441 | 1262 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1471 | 1299 |
Frequently asked questions
Is ERNIE 5.1 better than Qwen2.5 Plus 1127?
ERNIE 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is ERNIE 5.1 or Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 better for coding?
ERNIE 5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.0 versus 38.5 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do ERNIE 5.1 and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 share?
14 benchmarks have published results for both models. ERNIE 5.1 has 19 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 has 14.