Model comparison
GPT-5.2 Pro vs Qwen1.5-110B
GPT-5.2 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 52.2 to 33.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in math, where GPT-5.2 Pro leads 64.8 to 31.1.
- Qwen1.5-110B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GPT-5.2 Pro | Qwen1.5-110B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 52.2 | 33.6 |
| Released | 2025-12-11 | 2024-04-25 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 400K | — |
| Max output | 128K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $21 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $168 | — |
| Results tracked | 8 | 20 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Qwen1.5-110B: 32.4 (#260)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 35% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1184 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 44.4% |
Reasoning GPT-5.2 Pro leads
GPT-5.2 Pro: 51.8 (#31), Qwen1.5-110B: 21.7 (#192)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 54.2% | — |
| SimpleBench | 57.4% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 79.3% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 90.5% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1168 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 155.41 | — |
| ForecastBench | — | 57.7 |
Math GPT-5.2 Pro leads
GPT-5.2 Pro: 64.8 (#23), Qwen1.5-110B: 31.1 (#199)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 74% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 46% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1185 |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 31.3% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Qwen1.5-110B: 30.7 (#217)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | — | 1144 |
Multilingual Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Qwen1.5-110B: 33.8 (#245)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1142 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1206 |
| LMArena French | — | 1150 |
| LMArena German | — | 1123 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1074 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1044 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1118 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1141 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Qwen1.5-110B: 60.6 (#247)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1158 |
Long Context Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Qwen1.5-110B: 35.0 (#237)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1157 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
GPT-5.2 Pro: —, Qwen1.5-110B: 38.1 (#250)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1175 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1148 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1160 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-5.2 Pro better than Qwen1.5-110B?
GPT-5.2 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 52.2 to 33.6 on the Noometry Index.
How many benchmarks do GPT-5.2 Pro and Qwen1.5-110B share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.2 Pro has 8 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-110B has 20.