Noometry

Model comparison

GPT-3.5-turbo vs Qwen3.7 Flash

Qwen3.7 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.9 to 23.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 6 shared benchmarks.

GPT-3.5-turbo OpenAI

23.2

Rank #350 Confirmed

Qwen3.7 Flash Alibaba (Qwen)

39.9

Rank #156 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 6 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-3.5-turbo scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.7 Flash in 3 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.7 Flash leads 48.9 to 10.0.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 2.2% for GPT-3.5-turbo and 86.7% for Qwen3.7 Flash.
  • Qwen3.7 Flash is cheaper at $0.03 / $0.13 per million input/output tokens, against $0.50 / $1.50 for GPT-3.5-turbo.
  • Qwen3.7 Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 16K.

Side by side

GPT-3.5-turboQwen3.7 Flash
ProviderOpenAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index23.239.9
Released2023-03-012026-07-15
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window16K1M
Max output4K131K
Input $ / M tokens$0.50$0.03
Output $ / M tokens$1.50$0.13
Results tracked447

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

GPT-3.5-turbo: 23.9 (#331), Qwen3.7 Flash: —

BenchmarkGPT-3.5-turboQwen3.7 Flash
WeirdML3.5%—
BigCodeBench Instruct39.1%—
LMArena Coding1136—
BigCodeBench Complete50.6%—
HumanEval+70.7%—
MBPP+69.7%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GPT-3.5-turbo: —, Qwen3.7 Flash: —

BenchmarkGPT-3.5-turboQwen3.7 Flash
METR Time Horizons21.5%—

Reasoning Qwen3.7 Flash leads

GPT-3.5-turbo: 13.8 (#332), Qwen3.7 Flash: 28.2 (#108)

BenchmarkGPT-3.5-turboQwen3.7 Flash
Chess Puzzles0%23%
Mystery Game Puzzles3%15%
Epoch Capabilities Index118.55144.64
NYT Connections (extended)—43.8%
LMArena Hard Prompts1108—
DTBench48.5%—
LMCA9.7%—
Adversarial NLI58.1%—
BIG-Bench Hard61.6%—
CommonsenseQA 2.057%—
ForecastBench50.4—
WinoGrande81.6%—

Math Qwen3.7 Flash leads

GPT-3.5-turbo: 6.3 (#327), Qwen3.7 Flash: 38.3 (#140)

BenchmarkGPT-3.5-turboQwen3.7 Flash
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)0%19.3%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20252.2%86.7%
LMArena Math1142—
MATH Level 515.9%—
GSM8K57.8%—

Knowledge Qwen3.7 Flash leads

GPT-3.5-turbo: 10.0 (#303), Qwen3.7 Flash: 48.9 (#75)

BenchmarkGPT-3.5-turboQwen3.7 Flash
GPQA Diamond28%82.3%
LMArena Expert1070—
ARC (AI2) Challenge87.4%—
BoolQ87%—
MMLU71.4%—
OpenBookQA86%—
TriviaQA85.8%—

Multilingual Not comparable

GPT-3.5-turbo: 31.5 (#258), Qwen3.7 Flash: —

BenchmarkGPT-3.5-turboQwen3.7 Flash
LMArena Non-English1108—
LMArena Chinese1075—
LMArena French1118—
LMArena German1090—
LMArena Japanese1043—
LMArena Korean1019—
LMArena Russian1123—
LMArena Spanish1121—

Instruction Following Not comparable

GPT-3.5-turbo: 57.9 (#262), Qwen3.7 Flash: —

BenchmarkGPT-3.5-turboQwen3.7 Flash
LMArena Instruction Following1119—

Long Context Not comparable

GPT-3.5-turbo: 34.0 (#254), Qwen3.7 Flash: —

BenchmarkGPT-3.5-turboQwen3.7 Flash
LMArena Longer Query1121—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

GPT-3.5-turbo: 25.3 (#305), Qwen3.7 Flash: —

BenchmarkGPT-3.5-turboQwen3.7 Flash
LMArena Text1125—
LMArena Creative Writing1092—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing451—
LMArena Multi-Turn1117—

Frequently asked questions

Is GPT-3.5-turbo better than Qwen3.7 Flash?

Qwen3.7 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.9 to 23.2 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, GPT-3.5-turbo or Qwen3.7 Flash?

Qwen3.7 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.03 per million input tokens and $0.13 per million output tokens; GPT-3.5-turbo lists at $0.50 and $1.50.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.7 Flash does, with 1M tokens against 16K.

How many benchmarks do GPT-3.5-turbo and Qwen3.7 Flash share?

6 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-3.5-turbo has 44 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Flash has 7.

Related comparisons

Go deeper