Noometry

Model comparison

GPT-4.1 mini vs Qwen2.5-Max

Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.7 to 33.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.

GPT-4.1 mini OpenAI

33.6

Rank #240 Confirmed

Qwen2.5-Max Alibaba (Qwen)

40.7

Rank #146 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-4.1 mini scores higher in 1 category and Qwen2.5-Max in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen2.5-Max leads 25.6 to 10.8.

Side by side

GPT-4.1 miniQwen2.5-Max
ProviderOpenAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index33.640.7
Released2025-04-142025-01-25
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1.05M—
Max output33K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.40—
Output $ / M tokens$1.60—
Results tracked4727

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen2.5-Max leads

GPT-4.1 mini: 30.6 (#293), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.8 (#117)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 miniQwen2.5-Max
LMArena Coding13671359
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)23.9%—
Aider Polyglot32.4%—
SciCode40.4%—
WeirdML37.6%—
BigCodeBench Instruct48.9%—
LiveBench Coding—64.4%
CadEval16%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GPT-4.1 mini: 33.3 (#55), Qwen2.5-Max: —

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 miniQwen2.5-Max
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard50.5%—

Reasoning Qwen2.5-Max leads

GPT-4.1 mini: 10.8 (#340), Qwen2.5-Max: 25.6 (#147)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 miniQwen2.5-Max
LMArena Hard Prompts13491360
Epoch Capabilities Index135.01132.53
ARC-AGI-20%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark48.6%—
ARC-AGI-13.5%—
CritPt0%—
Chess Puzzles7%—
LiveBench Reasoning—51.4%
Mystery Game Puzzles7%—
DTBench68.8%—
LiveBench Data Analysis—67.9%
LMCA21.1%—
LiveBench—62.3%

Math Qwen2.5-Max leads

GPT-4.1 mini: 24.1 (#270), Qwen2.5-Max: 36.9 (#162)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 miniQwen2.5-Max
LMArena Math13431369
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)6.7%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202544.7%—
Omni-MATH49.1%—
LiveBench Math—58.4%
MATH Level 587.3%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)4.5%—

Knowledge Too close to call

GPT-4.1 mini: 34.7 (#194), Qwen2.5-Max: 35.3 (#186)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 miniQwen2.5-Max
LMArena Expert13381337
GPQA Diamond65.8%—
SimpleQA Verified12.7%—
MMLU-Pro78.3%—
Confabulations—21.8%
GPQA (HELM)61.4%—

Multimodal Not comparable

GPT-4.1 mini: 35.8 (#82), Qwen2.5-Max: —

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 miniQwen2.5-Max
LMArena Vision1181—

Multilingual Qwen2.5-Max leads

GPT-4.1 mini: 45.7 (#166), Qwen2.5-Max: 48.1 (#146)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 miniQwen2.5-Max
LMArena Non-English13181352
LMArena Chinese13291382
LMArena French13581396
LMArena German13511350
LMArena Japanese12901300
LMArena Korean12981304
LMArena Russian13241353
LMArena Spanish13191377

Instruction Following GPT-4.1 mini leads

GPT-4.1 mini: 73.7 (#118), Qwen2.5-Max: 71.3 (#152)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 miniQwen2.5-Max
LMArena Instruction Following13331335
LiveBench Instruction Following—75.3%
IFEval90.4%—

Long Context Qwen2.5-Max leads

GPT-4.1 mini: 31.8 (#275), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.4 (#142)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 miniQwen2.5-Max
LMArena Longer Query13441358
Fiction.LiveBench44.4%—

Writing & Preference Qwen2.5-Max leads

GPT-4.1 mini: 48.6 (#199), Qwen2.5-Max: 55.4 (#146)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 miniQwen2.5-Max
LMArena Text13401367
LMArena Creative Writing13001339
LMArena Multi-Turn13541364
Short-Story Creative Writing—72.9%
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1147—
WildBench83.8%—
LiveBench Language—56.3%

Frequently asked questions

Is GPT-4.1 mini better than Qwen2.5-Max?

Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.7 to 33.6 on the Noometry Index.

Is GPT-4.1 mini or Qwen2.5-Max better for coding?

Qwen2.5-Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.8 versus 30.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GPT-4.1 mini and Qwen2.5-Max share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-4.1 mini has 47 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Max has 27.

Related comparisons

Go deeper