Noometry

Model comparison

GPT-4.1 vs Qwen1.5-110B

GPT-4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.9 to 34.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.

GPT-4.1 OpenAI

35.9

Rank #219 Confirmed

Qwen1.5-110B Alibaba (Qwen)

34.2

Rank #234 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-4.1 scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen1.5-110B in 2 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GPT-4.1 leads 57.6 to 38.0.
  • Qwen1.5-110B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GPT-4.1Qwen1.5-110B
ProviderOpenAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index35.934.2
Released2025-04-142024-04-25
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1.05M—
Max output33K—
Input $ / M tokens$2—
Output $ / M tokens$8—
Results tracked5220

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

Category by category

Coding GPT-4.1 leads

GPT-4.1: 34.4 (#238), Qwen1.5-110B: 33.0 (#264)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Coding13911184
SWE-bench Verified48.5%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)39.6%—
Aider Polyglot52.4%—
WeirdML39%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—35%
BigCodeBench Complete—44.4%
CadEval42%—
ALE-Bench558.1—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GPT-4.1: 34.7 (#43), Qwen1.5-110B: —

BenchmarkGPT-4.1Qwen1.5-110B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard54%—

Reasoning Qwen1.5-110B leads

GPT-4.1: 11.7 (#339), Qwen1.5-110B: 22.7 (#189)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Hard Prompts13841168
ForecastBench61.557.7
ARC-AGI-20.4%—
SimpleBench27%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark52.3%—
ARC-AGI-15.5%—
Chess Puzzles6%—
EnigmaEval2.2%—
DTBench68.3%—
LMCA25.6%—
Epoch Capabilities Index136.78—

Math Qwen1.5-110B leads

GPT-4.1: 22.3 (#280), Qwen1.5-110B: 33.7 (#201)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Math13701185
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)6%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202538.3%—
Omni-MATH47.1%—
MATH Level 583%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)5.5%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)0%—

Knowledge GPT-4.1 leads

GPT-4.1: 37.1 (#160), Qwen1.5-110B: 31.2 (#219)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Expert13641144
GPQA Diamond66.9%—
Humanity's Last Exam5.4%—
SimpleQA Verified31.1%—
MMLU-Pro81.1%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate5.6%—
GPQA (HELM)65.9%—

Multimodal Not comparable

GPT-4.1: 38.2 (#67), Qwen1.5-110B: —

BenchmarkGPT-4.1Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Vision1211—
GeoBench72%—

Multilingual GPT-4.1 leads

GPT-4.1: 49.4 (#133), Qwen1.5-110B: 33.6 (#250)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Non-English13701142
LMArena Chinese13821206
LMArena French13821151
LMArena German13811123
LMArena Japanese13191074
LMArena Korean13391044
LMArena Russian13771118
LMArena Spanish13761142

Instruction Following GPT-4.1 leads

GPT-4.1: 71.3 (#153), Qwen1.5-110B: 60.3 (#252)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Instruction Following13671158
IFEval83.8%—

Long Context GPT-4.1 leads

GPT-4.1: 40.0 (#163), Qwen1.5-110B: 35.1 (#242)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Longer Query13851157
Fiction.LiveBench63.9%—

Writing & Preference GPT-4.1 leads

GPT-4.1: 57.6 (#125), Qwen1.5-110B: 38.0 (#255)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Text13831175
LMArena Creative Writing13631148
LMArena Multi-Turn13981160
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1420—
WildBench85.4%—

Frequently asked questions

Is GPT-4.1 better than Qwen1.5-110B?

GPT-4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.9 to 34.2 on the Noometry Index.

Is GPT-4.1 or Qwen1.5-110B better for coding?

GPT-4.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.4 versus 33.0 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GPT-4.1 and Qwen1.5-110B share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-4.1 has 52 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-110B has 20.

Related comparisons

Go deeper