Model comparison
gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3.5 Plus
Qwen3.5 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.3 to 36.0 on the Noometry Index. gpt-oss-120b costs 13× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.5 Plus's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 10 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. gpt-oss-120b scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.5 Plus in 3 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.5 Plus leads 32.0 to 19.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Mystery Game Puzzles: 2% for gpt-oss-120b and 17% for Qwen3.5 Plus.
- gpt-oss-120b is cheaper at $0.037 / $0.17 per million input/output tokens, against $0.40 / $2.40 for Qwen3.5 Plus.
- Qwen3.5 Plus accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 131K.
- gpt-oss-120b has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| gpt-oss-120b | Qwen3.5 Plus | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 36.0 | 42.3 |
| Released | 2025-08-05 | 2026-02-16 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 131K | 1M |
| Max output | 41K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.037 | $0.40 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.17 | $2.40 |
| Results tracked | 48 | 15 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
gpt-oss-120b: 33.2 (#251), Qwen3.5 Plus: —
| Benchmark | gpt-oss-120b | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| ALE-Bench | 575.62 | 621.92 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 26% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 41.8% | — |
| SciCode | 36% | — |
| WeirdML | 48.2% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1380 | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.41 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
gpt-oss-120b: 12.1 (#145), Qwen3.5 Plus: —
| Benchmark | gpt-oss-120b | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Vending-Bench 2 | -21.53 | 0.54 |
| Terminal-Bench | 18.7% | — |
| APEX-Agents | 4.4% | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 56.6% | — |
Reasoning Qwen3.5 Plus leads
gpt-oss-120b: 19.5 (#236), Qwen3.5 Plus: 32.0 (#67)
| Benchmark | gpt-oss-120b | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 20% | 22% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 2% | 17% |
| DTBench | 76.3% | 80.5% |
| LMCA | 22.1% | 36.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 139.94 | 146.79 |
| SimpleBench | 22.1% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 58.6% | — |
| CritPt | 1.1% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1364 | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 25% | — |
Math gpt-oss-120b leads
gpt-oss-120b: 50.6 (#43), Qwen3.5 Plus: 47.9 (#55)
| Benchmark | gpt-oss-120b | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 88.9% | 86.7% |
| Omni-MATH | 68.8% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1388 | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 21% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 2.1% |
Knowledge Qwen3.5 Plus leads
gpt-oss-120b: 42.3 (#89), Qwen3.5 Plus: 46.0 (#78)
| Benchmark | gpt-oss-120b | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 75.8% | 84.8% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 14.2% | 10.7% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 25.4% |
| MMLU-Pro | 79.5% | — |
| Confabulations | 15.7% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 68.4% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1356 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
gpt-oss-120b: 48.2 (#142), Qwen3.5 Plus: —
| Benchmark | gpt-oss-120b | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1350 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1384 | — |
| LMArena French | 1370 | — |
| LMArena German | 1355 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1332 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1283 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1343 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1388 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
gpt-oss-120b: 69.5 (#168), Qwen3.5 Plus: —
| Benchmark | gpt-oss-120b | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | 83.6% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1318 | — |
Long Context Qwen3.5 Plus leads
gpt-oss-120b: 31.4 (#273), Qwen3.5 Plus: 42.9 (#109)
| Benchmark | gpt-oss-120b | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 44.4% | — |
| CL-bench | — | 19.8% |
| CL-bench Life | — | 12.4% |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1319 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
gpt-oss-120b: 46.7 (#213), Qwen3.5 Plus: —
| Benchmark | gpt-oss-120b | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1366 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1274 | — |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 77.1% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 961 | — |
| WildBench | 84.5% | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1340 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is gpt-oss-120b better than Qwen3.5 Plus?
Qwen3.5 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.3 to 36.0 on the Noometry Index. gpt-oss-120b costs 13× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.5 Plus's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, gpt-oss-120b or Qwen3.5 Plus?
gpt-oss-120b is cheaper. It lists at $0.037 per million input tokens and $0.17 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5 Plus lists at $0.40 and $2.40.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3.5 Plus does, with 1M tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do gpt-oss-120b and Qwen3.5 Plus share?
10 benchmarks have published results for both models. gpt-oss-120b has 48 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 Plus has 15.