Noometry

Model comparison

GPT-4.1 mini vs Qwen2.5 Plus 1127

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.1 to 33.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.

GPT-4.1 mini OpenAI

33.5

Rank #232 Confirmed

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 Alibaba (Qwen)

38.1

Rank #179 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-4.1 mini scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 in 6 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads 24.8 to 10.9.

Side by side

GPT-4.1 miniQwen2.5 Plus 1127
ProviderOpenAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index33.538.1
Released2025-04-14—
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1.05M—
Max output33K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.40—
Output $ / M tokens$1.60—
Results tracked4714

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads

GPT-4.1 mini: 30.4 (#286), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 37.9 (#171)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 miniQwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Coding13671314
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)23.9%—
Aider Polyglot32.4%—
SciCode40.4%—
WeirdML37.6%—
BigCodeBench Instruct48.9%—
CadEval16%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GPT-4.1 mini: 33.0 (#52), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: —

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 miniQwen2.5 Plus 1127
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard50.5%—

Reasoning Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads

GPT-4.1 mini: 10.9 (#335), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 24.8 (#139)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 miniQwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Hard Prompts13491299
ARC-AGI-20%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark48.6%—
ARC-AGI-13.5%—
CritPt0%—
Chess Puzzles7%—
Mystery Game Puzzles7%—
DTBench68.8%—
LMCA21.1%—
Epoch Capabilities Index135.01—

Math Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads

GPT-4.1 mini: 23.1 (#264), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 33.5 (#175)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 miniQwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Math13431298
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)6.7%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202544.7%—
Omni-MATH49.1%—
MATH Level 587.3%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)4.5%—

Knowledge Too close to call

GPT-4.1 mini: 34.7 (#183), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 34.9 (#179)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 miniQwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Expert13381289
GPQA Diamond65.8%—
SimpleQA Verified12.7%—
MMLU-Pro78.3%—
GPQA (HELM)61.4%—

Multimodal Not comparable

GPT-4.1 mini: 35.2 (#77), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: —

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 miniQwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Vision1181—

Multilingual GPT-4.1 mini leads

GPT-4.1 mini: 45.9 (#161), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 42.1 (#196)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 miniQwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Non-English13181265
LMArena Chinese13291314
LMArena German13491231
LMArena Japanese12911207
LMArena Russian13241271
LMArena French1357—
LMArena Korean1298—
LMArena Spanish1319—

Instruction Following GPT-4.1 mini leads

GPT-4.1 mini: 73.9 (#113), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 67.4 (#194)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 miniQwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Instruction Following13321275
IFEval90.4%—

Long Context Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads

GPT-4.1 mini: 31.8 (#270), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 39.2 (#180)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 miniQwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Longer Query13441292
Fiction.LiveBench44.4%—

Writing & Preference Too close to call

GPT-4.1 mini: 48.8 (#193), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 49.5 (#186)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 miniQwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Text13411299
LMArena Creative Writing13001262
LMArena Multi-Turn13541299
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1147—
WildBench83.8%—

Frequently asked questions

Is GPT-4.1 mini better than Qwen2.5 Plus 1127?

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.1 to 33.5 on the Noometry Index.

Is GPT-4.1 mini or Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 better for coding?

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.9 versus 30.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GPT-4.1 mini and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 share?

14 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-4.1 mini has 47 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 has 14.

Related comparisons

Go deeper