Model comparison

GPT-4 vs Qwen1.5-110B

Qwen1.5-110B is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.2 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 20 shared benchmarks.

GPT-4 OpenAI

29.1

Rank #316 Confirmed

Qwen1.5-110B Alibaba (Qwen)

34.2

Rank #234 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-4 scores higher in 3 categories and Qwen1.5-110B in 5 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Qwen1.5-110B leads 33.7 to 10.8.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is BigCodeBench Complete: 57.2% for GPT-4 and 44.4% for Qwen1.5-110B.
  • Qwen1.5-110B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GPT-4 and Qwen1.5-110B specifications
GPT-4Qwen1.5-110B
ProviderOpenAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index29.134.2
Released2023-03-142024-04-25
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window8K—
Max output8K—
Input $ / M tokens$30—
Output $ / M tokens$60—
Results tracked3820

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen1.5-110B leads

GPT-4: 31.6 (#283), Qwen1.5-110B: 33.0 (#264)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-4Qwen1.5-110B
BigCodeBench Instruct46%35%
LMArena Coding12541184
BigCodeBench Complete57.2%44.4%
WeirdML12.4%—
HumanEval+79.3%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GPT-4: —, Qwen1.5-110B: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-4Qwen1.5-110B
METR Time Horizons36.1%—

Reasoning Qwen1.5-110B leads

GPT-4: 17.8 (#289), Qwen1.5-110B: 22.7 (#189)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-4Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Hard Prompts12411168
ForecastBench57.857.7
Chess Puzzles4%—
Mystery Game Puzzles12%—
DTBench62.7%—
LMCA17.1%—
BIG-Bench Hard75.1%—
Epoch Capabilities Index125.89—
HellaSwag95.3%—
WinoGrande87.5%—

Math Qwen1.5-110B leads

GPT-4: 10.8 (#309), Qwen1.5-110B: 33.7 (#201)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-4Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Math12691185
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20251.1%—
MATH Level 523%—
GSM8K92%—

Knowledge Qwen1.5-110B leads

GPT-4: 18.4 (#282), Qwen1.5-110B: 31.2 (#219)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-4Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Expert12111144
GPQA Diamond35.7%—
MMLU86.4%—
TriviaQA84.8%—

Multilingual GPT-4 leads

GPT-4: 40.6 (#215), Qwen1.5-110B: 33.6 (#250)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-4Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Non-English12461142
LMArena Chinese12421206
LMArena French12831151
LMArena German12511123
LMArena Japanese12091074
LMArena Korean11841044
LMArena Russian12511118
LMArena Spanish12611142

Instruction Following GPT-4 leads

GPT-4: 65.3 (#222), Qwen1.5-110B: 60.3 (#252)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-4Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Instruction Following12411158

Long Context GPT-4 leads

GPT-4: 37.7 (#212), Qwen1.5-110B: 35.1 (#242)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-4Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Longer Query12441157

Writing & Preference Qwen1.5-110B leads

GPT-4: 34.9 (#268), Qwen1.5-110B: 38.0 (#255)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-4Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Text12631175
LMArena Creative Writing12441148
LMArena Multi-Turn12571160
EQ-Bench Creative Writing752—

Frequently asked questions

Is GPT-4 better than Qwen1.5-110B?

Qwen1.5-110B is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.2 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.

Is GPT-4 or Qwen1.5-110B better for coding?

Qwen1.5-110B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 33.0 versus 31.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GPT-4 and Qwen1.5-110B share?

20 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-4 has 38 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-110B has 20.

Related comparisons

Go deeper