Model comparison
GPT-5 Nano vs Qwen Plus
Qwen Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.1 to 33.5 on the Noometry Index. GPT-5 Nano costs 4.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen Plus's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 20 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5 Nano scores higher in 4 categories and Qwen Plus in 4 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen Plus leads 52.2 to 39.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 81.1% for GPT-5 Nano and 17.8% for Qwen Plus.
- GPT-5 Nano is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $0.40 / $1.20 for Qwen Plus.
- Qwen Plus accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 400K.
Side by side
| GPT-5 Nano | Qwen Plus | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 33.5 | 37.1 |
| Released | 2025-08-07 | 2024-01-25 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 400K | 1M |
| Max output | 128K | 33K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.05 | $0.40 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.40 | $1.20 |
| Results tracked | 49 | 20 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen Plus leads
GPT-5 Nano: 33.6 (#254), Qwen Plus: 38.9 (#167)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Nano | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1351 | 1328 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 34.8% | — |
| WeirdML | 38.1% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 718.67 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GPT-5 Nano: 25.8 (#106), Qwen Plus: —
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Nano | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 21.8% | — |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 51.5% | — |
Reasoning Qwen Plus leads
GPT-5 Nano: 16.3 (#306), Qwen Plus: 28.4 (#107)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Nano | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 62.2% | 63.3% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1328 | 1317 |
| DTBench | 62.7% | 81.1% |
| LMCA | 7.9% | 24% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 2.6% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 20.7% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 27% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 9% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 139.38 | — |
| ForecastBench | 59.1 | — |
Math GPT-5 Nano leads
GPT-5 Nano: 29.4 (#241), Qwen Plus: 23.3 (#271)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Nano | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 81.1% | 17.8% |
| LMArena Math | 1317 | 1326 |
| MATH Level 5 | 95.2% | 65.3% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 8.3% | 1.7% |
| 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 Plus: 27.4 (#251)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Nano | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 69.4% | 48.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1321 | 1328 |
| 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 Plus: —
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Nano | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1159 | — |
| VPCT | 37.2% | — |
Multilingual Too close to call
GPT-5 Nano: 45.3 (#172), Qwen Plus: 45.1 (#175)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Nano | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1313 | 1310 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1356 | 1347 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1226 | 1251 |
| LMArena Russian | 1296 | 1323 |
| LMArena German | 1327 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1269 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1360 | — |
Instruction Following GPT-5 Nano leads
GPT-5 Nano: 75.0 (#79), Qwen Plus: 68.8 (#181)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Nano | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1306 | 1303 |
| IFEval | 93.2% | — |
Long Context Qwen Plus leads
GPT-5 Nano: 31.3 (#281), Qwen Plus: 40.3 (#158)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Nano | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1312 | 1324 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 44.4% | — |
Writing & Preference Qwen Plus leads
GPT-5 Nano: 39.1 (#249), Qwen Plus: 52.2 (#176)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Nano | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1320 | 1326 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1249 | 1293 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1311 | 1336 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 705 | — |
| WildBench | 80.6% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-5 Nano better than Qwen Plus?
Qwen Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.1 to 33.5 on the Noometry Index. GPT-5 Nano costs 4.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen Plus's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GPT-5 Nano or Qwen Plus?
GPT-5 Nano is cheaper. It lists at $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Qwen Plus lists at $0.40 and $1.20.
Is GPT-5 Nano or Qwen Plus better for coding?
Qwen Plus scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.9 versus 33.6 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen Plus does, with 1M tokens against 400K.
How many benchmarks do GPT-5 Nano and Qwen Plus share?
20 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5 Nano has 49 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Plus has 20.