Model comparison

Qwen1.5-72B vs Qwen3-4B

Qwen3-4B is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.5 to 30.3 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

Qwen1.5-72B Alibaba (Qwen)

30.3

Rank #282 Confirmed

Qwen3-4B Alibaba (Qwen)

31.5

Rank #261 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Qwen1.5-72B scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen3-4B in 1 category; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3-4B leads 33.0 to 11.5.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 28.8% for Qwen1.5-72B and 52.3% for Qwen3-4B.

Side by side

Qwen1.5-72B and Qwen3-4B specifications
Qwen1.5-72BQwen3-4B
ProviderAlibaba (Qwen)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index30.331.5
Released2024-02-042025-04-29
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window——
Max output——
Input $ / M tokens——
Output $ / M tokens——
Results tracked226

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Qwen1.5-72B: 31.4 (#272), Qwen3-4B: —

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen1.5-72BQwen3-4B
BigCodeBench Instruct33.2%—
LMArena Coding1166—
BigCodeBench Complete40.3%—
HumanEval+59.1%—
MBPP+61.6%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Qwen1.5-72B: —, Qwen3-4B: 27.3 (#94)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen1.5-72BQwen3-4B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—35.7%

Reasoning Qwen1.5-72B leads

Qwen1.5-72B: 21.2 (#201), Qwen3-4B: 18.5 (#264)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen1.5-72BQwen3-4B
Chess Puzzles—4%
LMArena Hard Prompts1148—

Math Qwen1.5-72B leads

Qwen1.5-72B: 30.7 (#205), Qwen3-4B: 28.5 (#228)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen1.5-72BQwen3-4B
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions—38.5%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—52.2%
LMArena Math1164—

Knowledge Qwen3-4B leads

Qwen1.5-72B: 11.5 (#295), Qwen3-4B: 33.0 (#198)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen1.5-72BQwen3-4B
GPQA Diamond28.8%52.3%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—5.7%
LMArena Expert1136—

Multilingual Not comparable

Qwen1.5-72B: 33.4 (#248), Qwen3-4B: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen1.5-72BQwen3-4B
LMArena Non-English1135—
LMArena Chinese1186—
LMArena French1158—
LMArena German1084—
LMArena Japanese1061—
LMArena Korean1049—
LMArena Russian1104—
LMArena Spanish1110—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Qwen1.5-72B: 59.6 (#251), Qwen3-4B: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen1.5-72BQwen3-4B
LMArena Instruction Following1142—

Long Context Not comparable

Qwen1.5-72B: 35.0 (#238), Qwen3-4B: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen1.5-72BQwen3-4B
LMArena Longer Query1157—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Qwen1.5-72B: 37.4 (#253), Qwen3-4B: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen1.5-72BQwen3-4B
LMArena Text1166—
LMArena Creative Writing1137—
LMArena Multi-Turn1160—

Frequently asked questions

Is Qwen1.5-72B better than Qwen3-4B?

Qwen3-4B is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.5 to 30.3 on the Noometry Index.

How many benchmarks do Qwen1.5-72B and Qwen3-4B share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. Qwen1.5-72B has 22 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3-4B has 6.

Related comparisons

Go deeper