Model comparison
GPT-5.1-Codex vs Qwen1.5-72B
GPT-5.1-Codex is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.2 to 30.3 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in coding, where GPT-5.1-Codex leads 41.7 to 31.4.
- Qwen1.5-72B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GPT-5.1-Codex | Qwen1.5-72B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 38.2 | 30.3 |
| Released | 2025-11-12 | 2024-02-04 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 400K | — |
| Max output | 128K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.25 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $10 | — |
| Results tracked | 6 | 22 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GPT-5.1-Codex leads
GPT-5.1-Codex: 41.7 (#107), Qwen1.5-72B: 31.4 (#272)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 66% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1337 | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 33.2% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1166 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 40.3% |
| ALE-Bench | 1,245 | — |
| HumanEval+ | — | 59.1% |
| MBPP+ | — | 61.6% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GPT-5.1-Codex: 37.8 (#32), Qwen1.5-72B: —
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 60.4% | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 70.8% | — |
Reasoning Not comparable
GPT-5.1-Codex: —, Qwen1.5-72B: 21.2 (#201)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1148 |
Math Qwen1.5-72B leads
GPT-5.1-Codex: 29.3 (#218), Qwen1.5-72B: 30.7 (#205)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | 9% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1164 |
Knowledge Not comparable
GPT-5.1-Codex: —, Qwen1.5-72B: 11.5 (#295)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 28.8% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1136 |
Multilingual Not comparable
GPT-5.1-Codex: —, Qwen1.5-72B: 33.4 (#248)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1135 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1186 |
| LMArena French | — | 1158 |
| LMArena German | — | 1084 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1061 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1049 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1104 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1110 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
GPT-5.1-Codex: —, Qwen1.5-72B: 59.6 (#251)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1142 |
Long Context Not comparable
GPT-5.1-Codex: —, Qwen1.5-72B: 35.0 (#238)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1157 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
GPT-5.1-Codex: —, Qwen1.5-72B: 37.4 (#253)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1166 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1137 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1160 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-5.1-Codex better than Qwen1.5-72B?
GPT-5.1-Codex is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.2 to 30.3 on the Noometry Index.
Is GPT-5.1-Codex or Qwen1.5-72B better for coding?
GPT-5.1-Codex scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.7 versus 31.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do GPT-5.1-Codex and Qwen1.5-72B share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.1-Codex has 6 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-72B has 22.