Noometry

Model comparison

GPT-5.5 Instant vs Qwen1.5-32B

GPT-5.5 Instant is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.7 to 30.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.

GPT-5.5 Instant OpenAI

42.7

Rank #110 Confirmed

Qwen1.5-32B Alibaba (Qwen)

30.5

Rank #293 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5.5 Instant scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen1.5-32B in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where GPT-5.5 Instant leads 48.9 to 13.5.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 82.5% for GPT-5.5 Instant and 30.7% for Qwen1.5-32B.
  • Qwen1.5-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GPT-5.5 InstantQwen1.5-32B
ProviderOpenAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index42.730.5
Released2026-05-052024-02-04
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window——
Max output——
Input $ / M tokens——
Output $ / M tokens——
Results tracked2721

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), Qwen1.5-32B: 31.7 (#282)

BenchmarkGPT-5.5 InstantQwen1.5-32B
LMArena Coding14331155
SciCode48.6%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—32.3%
BigCodeBench Complete—42%

Reasoning GPT-5.5 Instant leads

GPT-5.5 Instant: 24.9 (#155), Qwen1.5-32B: 21.8 (#212)

BenchmarkGPT-5.5 InstantQwen1.5-32B
LMArena Hard Prompts14261130
CritPt0%—
Chess Puzzles12%—
Epoch Capabilities Index142.52—

Math Qwen1.5-32B leads

GPT-5.5 Instant: 26.5 (#259), Qwen1.5-32B: 33.0 (#207)

BenchmarkGPT-5.5 InstantQwen1.5-32B
LMArena Math14201155
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)26.3%—
FrontierMath Tier 42.4%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202568.1%—

Knowledge GPT-5.5 Instant leads

GPT-5.5 Instant: 48.9 (#74), Qwen1.5-32B: 13.5 (#296)

BenchmarkGPT-5.5 InstantQwen1.5-32B
GPQA Diamond82.5%30.7%
LMArena Expert14091126
MMLU—74.4%

Multimodal Not comparable

GPT-5.5 Instant: 40.0 (#52), Qwen1.5-32B: —

BenchmarkGPT-5.5 InstantQwen1.5-32B
LMArena Vision1250—
LMArena Document1403—

Multilingual GPT-5.5 Instant leads

GPT-5.5 Instant: 52.8 (#80), Qwen1.5-32B: 31.4 (#259)

BenchmarkGPT-5.5 InstantQwen1.5-32B
LMArena Non-English14171106
LMArena Chinese14561177
LMArena French14281101
LMArena German14111058
LMArena Japanese14081027
LMArena Korean13921008
LMArena Russian14311073
LMArena Spanish14291089

Instruction Following GPT-5.5 Instant leads

GPT-5.5 Instant: 74.2 (#100), Qwen1.5-32B: 57.7 (#265)

BenchmarkGPT-5.5 InstantQwen1.5-32B
LMArena Instruction Following14061116

Long Context GPT-5.5 Instant leads

GPT-5.5 Instant: 43.4 (#96), Qwen1.5-32B: 34.7 (#246)

BenchmarkGPT-5.5 InstantQwen1.5-32B
LMArena Longer Query14221146

Writing & Preference GPT-5.5 Instant leads

GPT-5.5 Instant: 61.8 (#85), Qwen1.5-32B: 34.2 (#271)

BenchmarkGPT-5.5 InstantQwen1.5-32B
LMArena Text14191137
LMArena Creative Writing14191083
LMArena Multi-Turn14331140

Frequently asked questions

Is GPT-5.5 Instant better than Qwen1.5-32B?

GPT-5.5 Instant is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.7 to 30.5 on the Noometry Index.

Is GPT-5.5 Instant or Qwen1.5-32B better for coding?

GPT-5.5 Instant scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.3 versus 31.7 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GPT-5.5 Instant and Qwen1.5-32B share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.5 Instant has 27 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-32B has 21.

Related comparisons

Go deeper