Model comparison
GPT-4o mini vs Qwen3.5 Plus
Qwen3.5 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.9 to 25.5 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4o mini costs 3.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.5 Plus's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 8 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 8 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-4o mini scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.5 Plus in 4 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.5 Plus leads 49.6 to 10.4.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 6.9% for GPT-4o mini and 86.7% for Qwen3.5 Plus.
- GPT-4o mini is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.60 per million input/output tokens, against $0.40 / $2.40 for Qwen3.5 Plus.
- Qwen3.5 Plus accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.
Side by side
| GPT-4o mini | Qwen3.5 Plus | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 25.5 | 42.9 |
| Released | 2024-07-18 | 2026-02-16 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 128K | 1M |
| Max output | 16K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.15 | $0.40 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.60 | $2.40 |
| Results tracked | 60 | 15 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
GPT-4o mini: 22.0 (#335), Qwen3.5 Plus: —
| Benchmark | GPT-4o mini | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 3.6% | — |
| WeirdML | 11.8% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 46.1% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 43.1% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1290 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 57.4% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 621.92 |
| HumanEval+ | 83.5% | — |
| MBPP+ | 72.2% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GPT-4o mini: 27.5 (#101), Qwen3.5 Plus: —
| Benchmark | GPT-4o mini | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| BALROG | 17.4% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 0.54 |
Reasoning Qwen3.5 Plus leads
GPT-4o mini: 8.7 (#347), Qwen3.5 Plus: 32.8 (#74)
| Benchmark | GPT-4o mini | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | 22% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 12% | 17% |
| DTBench | 54.4% | 80.5% |
| LMCA | 10.4% | 36.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 126.56 | 146.78 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 0% | — |
| SimpleBench | 10.7% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 28.8% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 32.8% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1267 | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 50% | — |
| LiveBench | 41.3% | — |
| PIQA | 88.7% | — |
Math Qwen3.5 Plus leads
GPT-4o mini: 10.4 (#314), Qwen3.5 Plus: 49.6 (#61)
| Benchmark | GPT-4o mini | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 6.9% | 86.7% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 0.7% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 28% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 36.3% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1267 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 52.6% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 21% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 2.1% |
| GSM8K | 91.3% | — |
Knowledge Qwen3.5 Plus leads
GPT-4o mini: 17.7 (#284), Qwen3.5 Plus: 46.0 (#83)
| Benchmark | GPT-4o mini | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 37.7% | 84.8% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 8.3% | 25.4% |
| MMLU-Pro | 60.3% | — |
| Confabulations | 37.2% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 10.7% |
| GPQA (HELM) | 36.8% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1235 | — |
| BoolQ | 88.7% | — |
| MMLU | 81.8% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
GPT-4o mini: 25.9 (#122), Qwen3.5 Plus: —
| Benchmark | GPT-4o mini | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1066 | — |
| Video-MME | 64.8% | — |
| GeoBench | 64% | — |
| VPCT | 34% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
GPT-4o mini: 42.0 (#199), Qwen3.5 Plus: —
| Benchmark | GPT-4o mini | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1266 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1265 | — |
| LMArena French | 1297 | — |
| LMArena German | 1272 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1216 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1195 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1275 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1276 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
GPT-4o mini: 61.9 (#239), Qwen3.5 Plus: —
| Benchmark | GPT-4o mini | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 56.8% | — |
| IFEval | 78.2% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1258 | — |
Long Context Qwen3.5 Plus leads
GPT-4o mini: 39.1 (#186), Qwen3.5 Plus: 43.0 (#113)
| Benchmark | GPT-4o mini | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| CL-bench | — | 19.8% |
| CL-bench Life | — | 12.4% |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1289 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
GPT-4o mini: 39.5 (#248), Qwen3.5 Plus: —
| Benchmark | GPT-4o mini | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1286 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1268 | — |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 67.2% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 873 | — |
| WildBench | 79.1% | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1285 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 28.6% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-4o mini better than Qwen3.5 Plus?
Qwen3.5 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.9 to 25.5 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4o mini costs 3.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.5 Plus's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GPT-4o mini or Qwen3.5 Plus?
GPT-4o mini is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5 Plus lists at $0.40 and $2.40.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3.5 Plus does, with 1M tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do GPT-4o mini and Qwen3.5 Plus share?
8 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-4o mini has 60 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 Plus has 15.