Noometry

Model comparison

Qwen1.5-110B vs Qwen3.6 Plus

Qwen3.6 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.3 to 33.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

Qwen1.5-110B Alibaba (Qwen)

33.6

Rank #231 Confirmed

Qwen3.6 Plus Alibaba (Qwen)

47.3

Rank #54 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen1.5-110B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.6 Plus in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.6 Plus leads 56.1 to 30.7.
  • Qwen1.5-110B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Qwen1.5-110BQwen3.6 Plus
ProviderAlibaba (Qwen)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index33.647.3
Released2024-04-252026-03-31
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window—1M
Max output—66K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.50
Output $ / M tokens—$3
Results tracked2037

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.6 Plus leads

Qwen1.5-110B: 32.4 (#260), Qwen3.6 Plus: 40.6 (#125)

BenchmarkQwen1.5-110BQwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Coding11841467
SWE-bench Verified—57.9%
LMArena WebDev—1461
SciCode—40.7%
BigCodeBench Instruct35%—
BigCodeBench Complete44.4%—
ALE-Bench—670.15

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Qwen1.5-110B: —, Qwen3.6 Plus: —

BenchmarkQwen1.5-110BQwen3.6 Plus
Vending-Bench 2—5,115

Reasoning Qwen3.6 Plus leads

Qwen1.5-110B: 21.7 (#192), Qwen3.6 Plus: 28.5 (#89)

BenchmarkQwen1.5-110BQwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Hard Prompts11681449
NYT Connections (extended)—60.3%
CritPt—2.9%
Chess Puzzles—17%
Thematic Generalization—59.5%
Mystery Game Puzzles—12%
DTBench—81.9%
LMCA—33.1%
Epoch Capabilities Index—147.67
ForecastBench57.7—

Math Qwen3.6 Plus leads

Qwen1.5-110B: 31.1 (#199), Qwen3.6 Plus: 50.6 (#44)

BenchmarkQwen1.5-110BQwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Math11851450
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—38.2%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—93.3%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—26.2%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—8.3%

Knowledge Qwen3.6 Plus leads

Qwen1.5-110B: 30.7 (#217), Qwen3.6 Plus: 56.1 (#40)

BenchmarkQwen1.5-110BQwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Expert11441456
GPQA Diamond—88.4%
SimpleQA Verified—44.1%

Multilingual Qwen3.6 Plus leads

Qwen1.5-110B: 33.8 (#245), Qwen3.6 Plus: 53.5 (#66)

BenchmarkQwen1.5-110BQwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Non-English11421424
LMArena Chinese12061478
LMArena French11501454
LMArena German11231451
LMArena Japanese10741389
LMArena Korean10441381
LMArena Russian11181434
LMArena Spanish11411432

Instruction Following Qwen3.6 Plus leads

Qwen1.5-110B: 60.6 (#247), Qwen3.6 Plus: 75.2 (#70)

BenchmarkQwen1.5-110BQwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Instruction Following11581425

Long Context Qwen3.6 Plus leads

Qwen1.5-110B: 35.0 (#237), Qwen3.6 Plus: 45.1 (#48)

BenchmarkQwen1.5-110BQwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Longer Query11571440
CL-bench—20.3%

Writing & Preference Qwen3.6 Plus leads

Qwen1.5-110B: 38.1 (#250), Qwen3.6 Plus: 62.4 (#78)

BenchmarkQwen1.5-110BQwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text11751437
LMArena Creative Writing11481405
LMArena Multi-Turn11601438

Frequently asked questions

Is Qwen1.5-110B better than Qwen3.6 Plus?

Qwen3.6 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.3 to 33.6 on the Noometry Index.

Is Qwen1.5-110B or Qwen3.6 Plus better for coding?

Qwen3.6 Plus scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.6 versus 32.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Qwen1.5-110B and Qwen3.6 Plus share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen1.5-110B has 20 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Plus has 37.

Related comparisons

Go deeper