Model comparison
GPT-5.5 Instant vs Qwen-14B
GPT-5.5 Instant is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.7 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5.5 Instant scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen-14B in 1 category; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GPT-5.5 Instant leads 61.8 to 27.6.
- Qwen-14B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GPT-5.5 Instant | Qwen-14B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 42.7 | 31.4 |
| Released | 2026-05-05 | 2023-09-24 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 27 | 18 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GPT-5.5 Instant leads
GPT-5.5 Instant: 44.3 (#74), Qwen-14B: 31.2 (#288)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 Instant | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1433 | 1071 |
| SciCode | 48.6% | — |
Reasoning GPT-5.5 Instant leads
GPT-5.5 Instant: 24.9 (#155), Qwen-14B: 19.6 (#257)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 Instant | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1426 | 1027 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 142.52 | 113.03 |
| CritPt | 0% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 12% | — |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 55% |
| LAMBADA | — | 71.1% |
| PIQA | — | 79.9% |
Math Qwen-14B leads
GPT-5.5 Instant: 26.5 (#259), Qwen-14B: 31.2 (#227)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 Instant | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1420 | 1068 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 26.3% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 2.4% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 68.1% | — |
| GSM8K | — | 61.3% |
Knowledge Not comparable
GPT-5.5 Instant: 48.9 (#74), Qwen-14B: —
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 Instant | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 82.5% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1409 | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 84.4% |
| BoolQ | — | 86.2% |
| MMLU | — | 66.3% |
Multimodal Not comparable
GPT-5.5 Instant: 40.0 (#52), Qwen-14B: —
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 Instant | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1250 | — |
| LMArena Document | 1403 | — |
Multilingual GPT-5.5 Instant leads
GPT-5.5 Instant: 52.8 (#80), Qwen-14B: 27.5 (#275)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 Instant | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1417 | 1041 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1456 | 1077 |
| LMArena French | 1428 | — |
| LMArena German | 1411 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1408 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1392 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1431 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1429 | — |
Instruction Following GPT-5.5 Instant leads
GPT-5.5 Instant: 74.2 (#100), Qwen-14B: 52.4 (#289)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 Instant | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1406 | 1031 |
Long Context GPT-5.5 Instant leads
GPT-5.5 Instant: 43.4 (#96), Qwen-14B: 31.3 (#280)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 Instant | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1422 | 1028 |
Writing & Preference GPT-5.5 Instant leads
GPT-5.5 Instant: 61.8 (#85), Qwen-14B: 27.6 (#299)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 Instant | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1419 | 1051 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1419 | 1028 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1433 | 1022 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-5.5 Instant better than Qwen-14B?
GPT-5.5 Instant is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.7 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.
Is GPT-5.5 Instant or Qwen-14B better for coding?
GPT-5.5 Instant scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.3 versus 31.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do GPT-5.5 Instant and Qwen-14B share?
11 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.5 Instant has 27 scored results on Noometry and Qwen-14B has 18.