Model comparison
GPT-5.5 Instant vs Qwen2.5-Max
GPT-5.5 Instant is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.7 to 40.7 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5.5 Instant scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen2.5-Max in 2 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where GPT-5.5 Instant leads 48.9 to 35.3.
Side by side
| GPT-5.5 Instant | Qwen2.5-Max | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 42.7 | 40.7 |
| Released | 2026-05-05 | 2025-01-25 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 27 | 27 |
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), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.8 (#117)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 Instant | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1433 | 1359 |
| SciCode | 48.6% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 64.4% |
Reasoning Too close to call
GPT-5.5 Instant: 24.9 (#155), Qwen2.5-Max: 25.6 (#147)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 Instant | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1426 | 1360 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 142.52 | 132.53 |
| CritPt | 0% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 12% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 51.4% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 67.9% |
| LiveBench | — | 62.3% |
Math Qwen2.5-Max leads
GPT-5.5 Instant: 26.5 (#259), Qwen2.5-Max: 36.9 (#162)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 Instant | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1420 | 1369 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 26.3% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 2.4% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 68.1% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 58.4% |
Knowledge GPT-5.5 Instant leads
GPT-5.5 Instant: 48.9 (#74), Qwen2.5-Max: 35.3 (#186)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 Instant | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1409 | 1337 |
| GPQA Diamond | 82.5% | — |
| Confabulations | — | 21.8% |
Multimodal Not comparable
GPT-5.5 Instant: 40.0 (#52), Qwen2.5-Max: —
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 Instant | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1250 | — |
| LMArena Document | 1403 | — |
Multilingual GPT-5.5 Instant leads
GPT-5.5 Instant: 52.8 (#80), Qwen2.5-Max: 48.1 (#146)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 Instant | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1417 | 1352 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1456 | 1382 |
| LMArena French | 1428 | 1396 |
| LMArena German | 1411 | 1350 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1408 | 1300 |
| LMArena Korean | 1392 | 1304 |
| LMArena Russian | 1431 | 1353 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1429 | 1377 |
Instruction Following GPT-5.5 Instant leads
GPT-5.5 Instant: 74.2 (#100), Qwen2.5-Max: 71.3 (#152)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 Instant | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1406 | 1335 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 75.3% |
Long Context GPT-5.5 Instant leads
GPT-5.5 Instant: 43.4 (#96), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.4 (#142)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 Instant | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1422 | 1358 |
Writing & Preference GPT-5.5 Instant leads
GPT-5.5 Instant: 61.8 (#85), Qwen2.5-Max: 55.4 (#146)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 Instant | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1419 | 1367 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1419 | 1339 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1433 | 1364 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 72.9% |
| LiveBench Language | — | 56.3% |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-5.5 Instant better than Qwen2.5-Max?
GPT-5.5 Instant is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.7 to 40.7 on the Noometry Index.
Is GPT-5.5 Instant or Qwen2.5-Max better for coding?
GPT-5.5 Instant scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.3 versus 41.8 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do GPT-5.5 Instant and Qwen2.5-Max share?
18 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.5 Instant has 27 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Max has 27.