Model comparison
GPT-5 Nano vs Qwen Max
Qwen Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.7 to 33.5 on the Noometry Index. GPT-5 Nano costs 20× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 21 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5 Nano scores higher in 5 categories and Qwen Max in 3 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen Max leads 25.1 to 16.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 81.1% for GPT-5 Nano and 16.1% for Qwen Max.
- GPT-5 Nano is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $1.60 / $6.40 for Qwen Max.
- GPT-5 Nano accepts more context: 400K tokens versus 33K.
Side by side
| GPT-5 Nano | Qwen Max | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 33.5 | 34.7 |
| Released | 2025-08-07 | 2024-04-03 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 400K | 33K |
| Max output | 128K | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.05 | $1.60 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.40 | $6.40 |
| Results tracked | 49 | 23 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GPT-5 Nano leads
GPT-5 Nano: 33.6 (#254), Qwen Max: 30.7 (#292)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Nano | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1351 | 1288 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 34.8% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 21.8% |
| WeirdML | 38.1% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 718.67 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GPT-5 Nano: 25.8 (#106), Qwen Max: —
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Nano | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 21.8% | — |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 51.5% | — |
Reasoning Qwen Max leads
GPT-5 Nano: 16.3 (#306), Qwen Max: 25.1 (#151)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Nano | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1328 | 1269 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 2.6% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 62.2% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 20.7% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 27% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 9% | — |
| DTBench | 62.7% | — |
| LMCA | 7.9% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 139.38 | — |
| ForecastBench | 59.1 | — |
Math GPT-5 Nano leads
GPT-5 Nano: 29.4 (#241), Qwen Max: 22.3 (#276)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Nano | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 81.1% | 16.1% |
| LMArena Math | 1317 | 1275 |
| MATH Level 5 | 95.2% | 67.2% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 8.3% | 1% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 20% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 2.4% | — |
| ProofBench | 12% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 54.6% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 2.1% | — |
Knowledge GPT-5 Nano leads
GPT-5 Nano: 35.9 (#178), Qwen Max: 30.3 (#228)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Nano | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 69.4% | 56.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1321 | 1248 |
| SimpleQA Verified | 11.7% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 77.8% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 10.5% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 67.9% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
GPT-5 Nano: 31.3 (#108), Qwen Max: —
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Nano | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1159 | — |
| VPCT | 37.2% | — |
Multilingual GPT-5 Nano leads
GPT-5 Nano: 45.3 (#172), Qwen Max: 41.8 (#202)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Nano | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1313 | 1263 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1356 | 1254 |
| LMArena German | 1327 | 1254 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1226 | 1205 |
| LMArena Korean | 1269 | 1142 |
| LMArena Russian | 1296 | 1274 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1360 | 1290 |
| LMArena French | — | 1330 |
Instruction Following GPT-5 Nano leads
GPT-5 Nano: 75.0 (#79), Qwen Max: 66.5 (#208)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Nano | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1306 | 1262 |
| IFEval | 93.2% | — |
Long Context Qwen Max leads
GPT-5 Nano: 31.3 (#281), Qwen Max: 39.4 (#180)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Nano | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 44.4% | 66.7% |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1312 | 1288 |
Writing & Preference Qwen Max leads
GPT-5 Nano: 39.1 (#249), Qwen Max: 47.8 (#205)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Nano | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1320 | 1282 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1249 | 1248 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1311 | 1277 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 705 | — |
| WildBench | 80.6% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-5 Nano better than Qwen Max?
Qwen Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.7 to 33.5 on the Noometry Index. GPT-5 Nano costs 20× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GPT-5 Nano or Qwen Max?
GPT-5 Nano is cheaper. It lists at $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Qwen Max lists at $1.60 and $6.40.
Is GPT-5 Nano or Qwen Max better for coding?
GPT-5 Nano scores higher on coding benchmarks: 33.6 versus 30.7 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-5 Nano does, with 400K tokens against 33K.
How many benchmarks do GPT-5 Nano and Qwen Max share?
21 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5 Nano has 49 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Max has 23.