Model comparison

GPT-5.5 vs Qwen2.5 7B Instruct

GPT-5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 63.4 to 29.0 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5 7B Instruct costs 37× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 6 shared benchmarks.

GPT-5.5 OpenAI

63.4

Rank #9 Confirmed

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct Alibaba (Qwen)

29.0

Rank #320 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 6 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5.5 scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where GPT-5.5 leads 81.7 to 12.6.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 100% for GPT-5.5 and 2.5% for Qwen2.5 7B Instruct.
  • Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is cheaper at $0.17 / $0.70 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $30 for GPT-5.5.
  • GPT-5.5 accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 131K.
  • Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GPT-5.5 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct specifications
GPT-5.5Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
ProviderOpenAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index63.429.0
Released2026-04-232024-09
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1.05M131K
Max output128K8K
Input $ / M tokens$5$0.17
Output $ / M tokens$30$0.70
Results tracked7115

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding GPT-5.5 leads

GPT-5.5: 58.2 (#17), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 36.5 (#208)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.5Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
SWE-bench Verified80.6%—
DeepSWE67%—
FrontierCode43%—
LMArena WebDev1513—
SciCode56.1%—
GSO40.2%—
WeirdML84.9%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—37.6%
LMArena Coding1494—
MirrorCode10%—
BigCodeBench Complete—46.1%
ALE-Bench1,943—

Agentic & Tool Use GPT-5.5 leads

GPT-5.5: 50.7 (#6), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 23.8 (#124)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.5Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
Terminal-Bench84.7%—
APEX-Agents55.1%—
OSWorld 2.013%—
Remote Labor Index6.3%—
τ²-bench Banking44.6%—
DeepResearch Bench54%—
PostTrainBench27.2%—
BALROG—7.8%
ExploitBench47.4%—
GBAEval53.2%—
GDP.pdf26%—
LMArena Search1242—
Vending-Bench 27,524—

Reasoning GPT-5.5 leads

GPT-5.5: 72.8 (#11), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 14.8 (#322)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.5Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
Chess Puzzles54%0%
DTBench96%47.7%
LMCA54.3%6.4%
Epoch Capabilities Index159.1118.51
ARC-AGI-285%—
SimpleBench69%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark88.8%—
NYT Connections (extended)96.2%—
ARC-AGI-195%—
CritPt27.1%—
EBR-Bench34.3%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1489—
Mystery Game Puzzles56%—
Surface Evolver Bench88.1%—
Bench to the Future 30.14—
ForecastBench60.6—

Math GPT-5.5 leads

GPT-5.5: 81.7 (#11), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 12.6 (#306)

Knowledge GPT-5.5 leads

GPT-5.5: 64.4 (#17), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 17.0 (#286)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.5Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
GPQA Diamond94%35.5%
SimpleQA Verified63%—
MMLU-Pro—53.9%
Vectara Hallucination Rate9.3%—
GPQA (HELM)—34.1%
LMArena Expert1508—
MMLU—72.9%

Multimodal Not comparable

GPT-5.5: 46.9 (#12), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.5Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
LMArena Vision1297—
Blueprint-Bench 236.2%—
Furniture Assembly44.2%—
LMArena Document1486—

Multilingual Not comparable

GPT-5.5: 56.4 (#20), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.5Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
LMArena Non-English1467—
LMArena Chinese1533—
LMArena French1486—
LMArena German1480—
LMArena Japanese1498—
LMArena Korean1460—
LMArena Russian1473—
LMArena Spanish1468—

Instruction Following GPT-5.5 leads

GPT-5.5: 77.5 (#18), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 63.2 (#231)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.5Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
IFEval—74.1%
LMArena Instruction Following1479—

Long Context Not comparable

GPT-5.5: 48.3 (#12), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.5Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
CL-bench Life22.2%—
LMArena Longer Query1484—

Writing & Preference GPT-5.5 leads

GPT-5.5: 72.7 (#13), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 48.8 (#195)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.5Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
LMArena Text1472—
LMArena Creative Writing1455—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1844—
WildBench—73.1%
EQ-Bench 41315—
LMArena Multi-Turn1476—

Frequently asked questions

Is GPT-5.5 better than Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?

GPT-5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 63.4 to 29.0 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5 7B Instruct costs 37× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.5 or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is cheaper. It lists at $0.17 per million input tokens and $0.70 per million output tokens; GPT-5.5 lists at $5 and $30.

Is GPT-5.5 or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct better for coding?

GPT-5.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 58.2 versus 36.5 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

GPT-5.5 does, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do GPT-5.5 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct share?

6 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.5 has 71 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has 15.

Related comparisons

Go deeper