Model comparison

gpt-oss-20b vs Qwen1.5-110B

Qwen1.5-110B is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.6 to 32.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.

gpt-oss-20b OpenAI

32.1

Rank #249 Confirmed

Qwen1.5-110B Alibaba (Qwen)

33.6

Rank #231 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. gpt-oss-20b scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen1.5-110B in 2 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in multilingual, where gpt-oss-20b leads 42.4 to 33.8.

Side by side

gpt-oss-20b and Qwen1.5-110B specifications
gpt-oss-20bQwen1.5-110B
ProviderOpenAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index32.133.6
Released2025-08-052024-04-25
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window131K—
Max output16K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.018—
Output $ / M tokens$0.09—
Results tracked3420

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

Category by category

Coding gpt-oss-20b leads

gpt-oss-20b: 37.1 (#185), Qwen1.5-110B: 32.4 (#260)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmarkgpt-oss-20bQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Coding13071184
SciCode34.4%—
WeirdML40.9%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—35%
BigCodeBench Complete—44.4%
ALE-Bench566.05—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

gpt-oss-20b: 9.2 (#146), Qwen1.5-110B: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmarkgpt-oss-20bQwen1.5-110B
Terminal-Bench3.4%—

Reasoning Qwen1.5-110B leads

gpt-oss-20b: 18.8 (#251), Qwen1.5-110B: 21.7 (#192)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmarkgpt-oss-20bQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Hard Prompts12741168
Kagi LLM Benchmark53.2%—
CritPt1.4%—
Chess Puzzles4%—
DTBench68%—
LMCA14.5%—
Epoch Capabilities Index137.81—
ForecastBench—57.7

Math gpt-oss-20b leads

gpt-oss-20b: 37.6 (#93), Qwen1.5-110B: 31.1 (#199)

Math benchmarks
Benchmarkgpt-oss-20bQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Math13171185
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202565.3%—
Omni-MATH56.5%—

Knowledge gpt-oss-20b leads

gpt-oss-20b: 34.6 (#186), Qwen1.5-110B: 30.7 (#217)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmarkgpt-oss-20bQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Expert12581144
GPQA Diamond60.8%—
MMLU-Pro74%—
GPQA (HELM)59.4%—

Multilingual gpt-oss-20b leads

gpt-oss-20b: 42.4 (#192), Qwen1.5-110B: 33.8 (#245)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmarkgpt-oss-20bQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Non-English12691142
LMArena Chinese13111206
LMArena German12491123
LMArena Japanese12451074
LMArena Korean12391044
LMArena Russian12791118
LMArena Spanish12671141
LMArena French—1150

Instruction Following gpt-oss-20b leads

gpt-oss-20b: 62.0 (#235), Qwen1.5-110B: 60.6 (#247)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmarkgpt-oss-20bQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Instruction Following12361158
IFEval73.2%—

Long Context gpt-oss-20b leads

gpt-oss-20b: 37.9 (#203), Qwen1.5-110B: 35.0 (#237)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmarkgpt-oss-20bQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Longer Query12511157

Writing & Preference Qwen1.5-110B leads

gpt-oss-20b: 35.8 (#260), Qwen1.5-110B: 38.1 (#250)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmarkgpt-oss-20bQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Text12881175
LMArena Creative Writing12011148
LMArena Multi-Turn12681160
EQ-Bench Creative Writing666—
WildBench73.7%—

Frequently asked questions

Is gpt-oss-20b better than Qwen1.5-110B?

Qwen1.5-110B is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.6 to 32.1 on the Noometry Index.

Is gpt-oss-20b or Qwen1.5-110B better for coding?

gpt-oss-20b scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.1 versus 32.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do gpt-oss-20b and Qwen1.5-110B share?

16 benchmarks have published results for both models. gpt-oss-20b has 34 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-110B has 20.

Related comparisons

Go deeper