Noometry

Model comparison

Qwen1.5 4b Chat vs Qwen3 235B-A22B

Qwen3 235B-A22B is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.5 to 28.8 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.

Qwen1.5 4b Chat Alibaba (Qwen)

28.8

Rank #322 Confirmed

Qwen3 235B-A22B Alibaba (Qwen)

43.5

Rank #91 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen1.5 4b Chat scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3 235B-A22B in 7 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen3 235B-A22B leads 59.6 to 23.8.

Side by side

Qwen1.5 4b ChatQwen3 235B-A22B
ProviderAlibaba (Qwen)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index28.843.5
Released—2025-04
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—131K
Max output—16K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.70
Output $ / M tokens—$2.80
Results tracked1349

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3 235B-A22B leads

Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 29.1 (#308), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 44.3 (#75)

BenchmarkQwen1.5 4b ChatQwen3 235B-A22B
LMArena Coding9991445
Aider Polyglot—59.6%
SciCode—42.4%
WeirdML—41%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Qwen1.5 4b Chat: —, Qwen3 235B-A22B: 33.9 (#51)

BenchmarkQwen1.5 4b ChatQwen3 235B-A22B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—52.1%
Vending-Bench 2—-11.34

Reasoning Qwen1.5 4b Chat leads

Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 18.5 (#279), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 15.7 (#311)

BenchmarkQwen1.5 4b ChatQwen3 235B-A22B
LMArena Hard Prompts9761433
ARC-AGI-2—1.3%
SimpleBench—31%
Kagi LLM Benchmark—69.4%
ARC-AGI-1—11%
CritPt—0%
Chess Puzzles—12%
Mystery Game Puzzles—9%
DTBench—80.3%
LMCA—29.3%
Epoch Capabilities Index—143.85
ForecastBench—59.7

Math Qwen3 235B-A22B leads

Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 30.4 (#234), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 50.4 (#57)

BenchmarkQwen1.5 4b ChatQwen3 235B-A22B
LMArena Math10261432
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—86.7%
Omni-MATH—71.8%
MATH Level 5—68.9%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—8.5%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—0%

Knowledge Qwen3 235B-A22B leads

Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 26.7 (#255), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 49.6 (#73)

BenchmarkQwen1.5 4b ChatQwen3 235B-A22B
LMArena Expert9801463
GPQA Diamond—80.1%
SimpleQA Verified—40.4%
MMLU-Pro—84.4%
Confabulations—15.6%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—9.3%
GPQA (HELM)—72.7%

Multilingual Qwen3 235B-A22B leads

Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 24.1 (#290), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 52.3 (#89)

BenchmarkQwen1.5 4b ChatQwen3 235B-A22B
LMArena Non-English9791409
LMArena Chinese10241481
LMArena German9021433
LMArena Russian9521411
LMArena French—1445
LMArena Japanese—1399
LMArena Korean—1391
LMArena Spanish—1430

Instruction Following Qwen3 235B-A22B leads

Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 49.0 (#300), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 72.6 (#136)

BenchmarkQwen1.5 4b ChatQwen3 235B-A22B
LMArena Instruction Following9781408
IFEval—83.5%

Long Context Qwen3 235B-A22B leads

Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 30.1 (#290), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 46.1 (#26)

BenchmarkQwen1.5 4b ChatQwen3 235B-A22B
LMArena Longer Query9881426
Fiction.LiveBench—75%

Writing & Preference Qwen3 235B-A22B leads

Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 23.8 (#309), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 59.6 (#108)

BenchmarkQwen1.5 4b ChatQwen3 235B-A22B
LMArena Text9971419
LMArena Creative Writing9691384
LMArena Multi-Turn9771432
Short-Story Creative Writing—83%
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1366
WildBench—86.6%

Frequently asked questions

Is Qwen1.5 4b Chat better than Qwen3 235B-A22B?

Qwen3 235B-A22B is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.5 to 28.8 on the Noometry Index.

Is Qwen1.5 4b Chat or Qwen3 235B-A22B better for coding?

Qwen3 235B-A22B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.3 versus 29.1 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Qwen1.5 4b Chat and Qwen3 235B-A22B share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen1.5 4b Chat has 13 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 235B-A22B has 49.

Related comparisons

Go deeper