Model comparison
Qwen1.5-7B vs Step 3.5 Flash
Step 3.5 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.3 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)
StepFunSummary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen1.5-7B scores higher in 0 categories and Step 3.5 Flash in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Step 3.5 Flash leads 58.8 to 29.6.
Side by side
| Qwen1.5-7B | Step 3.5 Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | StepFun |
| Noometry Index | 31.4 | 42.3 |
| Released | 2024-02-04 | 2026-01-29 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 256K |
| Max output | — | 256K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.10 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.30 |
| Results tracked | 13 | 19 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Step 3.5 Flash leads
Qwen1.5-7B: 32.2 (#276), Step 3.5 Flash: 42.4 (#105)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | Step 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1107 | 1436 |
Reasoning Step 3.5 Flash leads
Qwen1.5-7B: 20.4 (#240), Step 3.5 Flash: 22.2 (#202)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | Step 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1065 | 1411 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 28.4% |
Math Step 3.5 Flash leads
Qwen1.5-7B: 31.4 (#224), Step 3.5 Flash: 42.6 (#84)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | Step 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1080 | 1408 |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 66.8% |
Knowledge Step 3.5 Flash leads
Qwen1.5-7B: 28.7 (#243), Step 3.5 Flash: 39.6 (#132)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | Step 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1055 | 1421 |
| MMLU | 62.6% | — |
Multilingual Step 3.5 Flash leads
Qwen1.5-7B: 28.5 (#271), Step 3.5 Flash: 50.5 (#119)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | Step 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1058 | 1385 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1141 | 1447 |
| LMArena Russian | 1006 | 1385 |
| LMArena French | — | 1421 |
| LMArena German | — | 1405 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1354 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1352 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1419 |
Instruction Following Step 3.5 Flash leads
Qwen1.5-7B: 54.1 (#281), Step 3.5 Flash: 73.1 (#124)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | Step 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1058 | 1385 |
Long Context Step 3.5 Flash leads
Qwen1.5-7B: 33.1 (#266), Step 3.5 Flash: 42.8 (#117)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | Step 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1090 | 1402 |
Writing & Preference Step 3.5 Flash leads
Qwen1.5-7B: 29.6 (#293), Step 3.5 Flash: 58.8 (#113)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-7B | Step 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1083 | 1403 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1035 | 1357 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1062 | 1405 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Qwen1.5-7B better than Step 3.5 Flash?
Step 3.5 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.3 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.
Is Qwen1.5-7B or Step 3.5 Flash better for coding?
Step 3.5 Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.4 versus 32.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Qwen1.5-7B and Step 3.5 Flash share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen1.5-7B has 13 scored results on Noometry and Step 3.5 Flash has 19.