Noometry

Model comparison

gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen1.5-110B

gpt-oss-120b is the stronger model overall, scoring 36.3 to 34.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

gpt-oss-120b OpenAI

36.3

Rank #217 Confirmed

Qwen1.5-110B Alibaba (Qwen)

34.2

Rank #234 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. gpt-oss-120b scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen1.5-110B in 2 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where gpt-oss-120b leads 52.5 to 33.7.

Side by side

gpt-oss-120bQwen1.5-110B
ProviderOpenAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index36.334.2
Released2025-08-052024-04-25
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window131K—
Max output41K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.037—
Output $ / M tokens$0.17—
Results tracked4820

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

Category by category

Coding Too close to call

gpt-oss-120b: 33.5 (#256), Qwen1.5-110B: 33.0 (#264)

Benchmarkgpt-oss-120bQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Coding13801184
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)26%—
Aider Polyglot41.8%—
SciCode36%—
WeirdML48.2%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—35%
BigCodeBench Complete—44.4%
ALE-Bench575.62—
AlgoTune1.41—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

gpt-oss-120b: 12.2 (#153), Qwen1.5-110B: —

Benchmarkgpt-oss-120bQwen1.5-110B
Terminal-Bench18.7%—
APEX-Agents4.4%—
METR Time Horizons56.6%—
Vending-Bench 2-21.53—

Reasoning Qwen1.5-110B leads

gpt-oss-120b: 20.0 (#245), Qwen1.5-110B: 22.7 (#189)

Benchmarkgpt-oss-120bQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Hard Prompts13641168
SimpleBench22.1%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark58.6%—
CritPt1.1%—
Chess Puzzles20%—
Mystery Game Puzzles2%—
DTBench76.3%—
LMCA22.1%—
Surface Evolver Bench25%—
Epoch Capabilities Index139.93—
ForecastBench—57.7

Math gpt-oss-120b leads

gpt-oss-120b: 52.5 (#50), Qwen1.5-110B: 33.7 (#201)

Benchmarkgpt-oss-120bQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Math13891185
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202588.9%—
Omni-MATH68.8%—

Knowledge gpt-oss-120b leads

gpt-oss-120b: 42.4 (#96), Qwen1.5-110B: 31.2 (#219)

Benchmarkgpt-oss-120bQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Expert13561144
GPQA Diamond75.8%—
MMLU-Pro79.5%—
Confabulations15.7%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate14.2%—
GPQA (HELM)68.4%—

Multilingual gpt-oss-120b leads

gpt-oss-120b: 48.0 (#147), Qwen1.5-110B: 33.6 (#250)

Benchmarkgpt-oss-120bQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Non-English13511142
LMArena Chinese13851206
LMArena French13691151
LMArena German13531123
LMArena Japanese13311074
LMArena Korean12821044
LMArena Russian13431118
LMArena Spanish13891142

Instruction Following gpt-oss-120b leads

gpt-oss-120b: 69.3 (#173), Qwen1.5-110B: 60.3 (#252)

Benchmarkgpt-oss-120bQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Instruction Following13181158
IFEval83.6%—

Long Context Qwen1.5-110B leads

gpt-oss-120b: 31.4 (#278), Qwen1.5-110B: 35.1 (#242)

Benchmarkgpt-oss-120bQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Longer Query13191157
Fiction.LiveBench44.4%—

Writing & Preference gpt-oss-120b leads

gpt-oss-120b: 46.5 (#217), Qwen1.5-110B: 38.0 (#255)

Benchmarkgpt-oss-120bQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Text13651175
LMArena Creative Writing12751148
LMArena Multi-Turn13401160
Short-Story Creative Writing77.1%—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing961—
WildBench84.5%—

Frequently asked questions

Is gpt-oss-120b better than Qwen1.5-110B?

gpt-oss-120b is the stronger model overall, scoring 36.3 to 34.2 on the Noometry Index.

Is gpt-oss-120b or Qwen1.5-110B better for coding?

They score almost the same on coding (33.5 vs 33.0); test both on your own repository before choosing.

How many benchmarks do gpt-oss-120b and Qwen1.5-110B share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. gpt-oss-120b has 48 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-110B has 20.

Related comparisons

Go deeper