Model comparison
GPT-6.1 Sol vs Qwen1.5-14B
GPT-6.1 Sol is the stronger model overall, scoring 65.6 to 32.7 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-6.1 Sol scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen1.5-14B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where GPT-6.1 Sol leads 93.7 to 32.4.
- Qwen1.5-14B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GPT-6.1 Sol | Qwen1.5-14B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 65.6 | 32.7 |
| Released | 2026-09-29 | 2024-02-04 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | — |
| Max output | 128K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $2 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $10 | — |
| Results tracked | 34 | 17 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GPT-6.1 Sol leads
GPT-6.1 Sol: 63.2 (#8), Qwen1.5-14B: 33.1 (#263)
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | Qwen1.5-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1487 | 1138 |
| DeepSWE | 75.2% | — |
| FrontierCode | 50.2% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1755 | — |
| SciCode | 55.8% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GPT-6.1 Sol: 39.6 (#26), Qwen1.5-14B: —
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | Qwen1.5-14B |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 60% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 32% | — |
Reasoning GPT-6.1 Sol leads
GPT-6.1 Sol: 81.9 (#2), Qwen1.5-14B: 21.4 (#223)
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | Qwen1.5-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1466 | 1113 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 94.2% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 95.5% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 98.5% | — |
| CritPt | 31.7% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 61% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 54.3% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 80% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 166.09 | — |
Math GPT-6.1 Sol leads
GPT-6.1 Sol: 93.7 (#1), Qwen1.5-14B: 32.4 (#215)
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | Qwen1.5-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1464 | 1125 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 93.7% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 100% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 100% | — |
| ProofBench | 99% | — |
Knowledge GPT-6.1 Sol leads
GPT-6.1 Sol: 71.8 (#4), Qwen1.5-14B: 29.8 (#232)
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | Qwen1.5-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1502 | 1094 |
| GPQA Diamond | 95.4% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 73.9% | — |
| MMLU | — | 68.6% |
Multimodal Not comparable
GPT-6.1 Sol: 52.7 (#5), Qwen1.5-14B: —
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | Qwen1.5-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1288 | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 80% | — |
Multilingual GPT-6.1 Sol leads
GPT-6.1 Sol: 54.3 (#46), Qwen1.5-14B: 30.7 (#262)
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | Qwen1.5-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1438 | 1095 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1477 | 1147 |
| LMArena Russian | 1455 | 1046 |
| LMArena French | — | 1116 |
| LMArena German | — | 1043 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1019 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1085 |
Instruction Following GPT-6.1 Sol leads
GPT-6.1 Sol: 77.0 (#29), Qwen1.5-14B: 56.8 (#271)
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | Qwen1.5-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1468 | 1102 |
Long Context GPT-6.1 Sol leads
GPT-6.1 Sol: 44.9 (#54), Qwen1.5-14B: 33.7 (#257)
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | Qwen1.5-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1465 | 1113 |
Writing & Preference GPT-6.1 Sol leads
GPT-6.1 Sol: 63.6 (#63), Qwen1.5-14B: 33.6 (#276)
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | Qwen1.5-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1447 | 1128 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1432 | 1091 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1449 | 1110 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-6.1 Sol better than Qwen1.5-14B?
GPT-6.1 Sol is the stronger model overall, scoring 65.6 to 32.7 on the Noometry Index.
Is GPT-6.1 Sol or Qwen1.5-14B better for coding?
GPT-6.1 Sol scores higher on coding benchmarks: 63.2 versus 33.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do GPT-6.1 Sol and Qwen1.5-14B share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-6.1 Sol has 34 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-14B has 17.