Model comparison
Qwen1.5-7B vs Qwen3.6 Flash
Qwen3.6 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.4 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.6 Flash leads 42.2 to 28.2.
- Qwen1.5-7B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Qwen1.5-7B | Qwen3.6 Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 30.8 | 38.4 |
| Released | 2024-02-04 | 2026-04-27 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 1M |
| Max output | — | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.19 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $1.13 |
| Results tracked | 13 | 13 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Qwen1.5-7B: 31.6 (#271), Qwen3.6 Flash: —
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1107 | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 326.4 |
Reasoning Qwen3.6 Flash leads
Qwen1.5-7B: 19.5 (#237), Qwen3.6 Flash: 28.4 (#90)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleBench | — | 35.2% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 20% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1066 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 18% |
| DTBench | — | 77.1% |
| LMCA | — | 31% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 143.26 |
Math Qwen3.6 Flash leads
Qwen1.5-7B: 29.0 (#222), Qwen3.6 Flash: 38.0 (#88)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 22.5% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 84.4% |
| LMArena Math | 1080 | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 10.3% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 0% |
Knowledge Qwen3.6 Flash leads
Qwen1.5-7B: 28.2 (#239), Qwen3.6 Flash: 42.2 (#90)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 83.3% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 15.9% |
| LMArena Expert | 1055 | — |
| MMLU | 62.6% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Qwen1.5-7B: 28.6 (#266), Qwen3.6 Flash: —
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1058 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1140 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1006 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Qwen1.5-7B: 54.4 (#276), Qwen3.6 Flash: —
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1058 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Qwen1.5-7B: 33.1 (#261), Qwen3.6 Flash: —
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1090 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Qwen1.5-7B: 29.8 (#288), Qwen3.6 Flash: —
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1084 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1035 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1061 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Qwen1.5-7B better than Qwen3.6 Flash?
Qwen3.6 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.4 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.
How many benchmarks do Qwen1.5-7B and Qwen3.6 Flash share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen1.5-7B has 13 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Flash has 13.