Model comparison
Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) vs Qwen3.5 397B-A17B
Qwen3.5 397B-A17B is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.0 to 32.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 22 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 22 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) 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 29.4.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 23.1% for Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) and 88.9% for Qwen3.5 397B-A17B.
- Qwen3.5 397B-A17B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) | Qwen3.5 397B-A17B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 32.1 | 46.0 |
| Released | 2024-02-15 | 2026-02-01 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 262K |
| Max output | — | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.60 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $3.60 |
| Results tracked | 45 | 36 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads
Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024): 34.2 (#241), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 42.0 (#114)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) | Qwen3.5 397B-A17B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1294 | 1465 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1400 |
| WeirdML | 22.2% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 43.8% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 57.5% | — |
| CadEval | 34% | — |
| HumanEval+ | 79.3% | — |
| MBPP+ | 74.6% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads
Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024): 17.9 (#145), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 33.3 (#53)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) | Qwen3.5 397B-A17B |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 24.9% |
| TheAgentCompany | 3.4% | — |
| τ²-bench Airline | — | 81.5% |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 9.8% |
| τ²-bench Retail | — | 84.4% |
| τ²-bench Telecom | — | 97.8% |
| Cybench | 7.5% | — |
| BALROG | 21% | — |
Reasoning Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads
Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024): 12.3 (#338), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 34.5 (#70)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) | Qwen3.5 397B-A17B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1296 | 1448 |
| DTBench | 59% | 87.5% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 131.73 | 146.65 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 0.8% | — |
| SimpleBench | 27.1% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 73.7% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 58.9% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 13% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 65.1% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 18% |
| LMCA | — | 37.9% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 89.2% | — |
| ForecastBench | 58.4 | — |
Math Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads
Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024): 25.8 (#266), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 46.1 (#73)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) | Qwen3.5 397B-A17B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 23.1% | 88.9% |
| LMArena Math | 1315 | 1454 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 31.2% |
| Omni-MATH | 36.4% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 70.4% | — |
Knowledge Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads
Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024): 29.4 (#239), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 53.3 (#58)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) | Qwen3.5 397B-A17B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 57.2% | 86.4% |
| LMArena Expert | 1279 | 1462 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 4.6% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 73.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 13.5% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 53.4% | — |
| MMLU | 86.9% | — |
Multimodal Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads
Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024): 36.8 (#77), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 40.7 (#44)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) | Qwen3.5 397B-A17B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1161 | 1263 |
| Video-MME | 75% | — |
Multilingual Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads
Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024): 45.3 (#174), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 53.7 (#59)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) | Qwen3.5 397B-A17B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1312 | 1430 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1331 | 1500 |
| LMArena French | 1302 | 1461 |
| LMArena German | 1286 | 1447 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1292 | 1426 |
| LMArena Korean | 1298 | 1384 |
| LMArena Russian | 1320 | 1429 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1311 | 1441 |
Instruction Following Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads
Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024): 68.6 (#185), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 75.0 (#77)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) | Qwen3.5 397B-A17B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1297 | 1424 |
| IFEval | 83.7% | — |
Long Context Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads
Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024): 39.8 (#169), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 44.1 (#74)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) | Qwen3.5 397B-A17B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1308 | 1442 |
Writing & Preference Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads
Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024): 52.4 (#172), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 62.3 (#79)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) | Qwen3.5 397B-A17B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1319 | 1438 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1333 | 1401 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1296 | 1446 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1478 |
| WildBench | 81.3% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) better than Qwen3.5 397B-A17B?
Qwen3.5 397B-A17B is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.0 to 32.1 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) or Qwen3.5 397B-A17B better for coding?
Qwen3.5 397B-A17B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.0 versus 34.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) and Qwen3.5 397B-A17B share?
22 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) has 45 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 397B-A17B has 36.