Model comparison
Qwen2.5-Max vs Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.7 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen2.5-Max scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 in 2 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in multilingual, where Qwen2.5-Max leads 48.1 to 41.9.
Side by side
| Qwen2.5-Max | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 40.7 | 38.8 |
| Released | 2025-01-25 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 27 | 14 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen2.5-Max leads
Qwen2.5-Max: 41.8 (#117), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 38.5 (#175)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5-Max | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1359 | 1314 |
| LiveBench Coding | 64.4% | — |
Reasoning Too close to call
Qwen2.5-Max: 25.6 (#147), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 25.9 (#141)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5-Max | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1360 | 1299 |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 51.4% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 67.9% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 132.53 | — |
| LiveBench | 62.3% | — |
Math Too close to call
Qwen2.5-Max: 36.9 (#162), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 36.1 (#174)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5-Max | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1369 | 1298 |
| LiveBench Math | 58.4% | — |
Knowledge Too close to call
Qwen2.5-Max: 35.3 (#186), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 35.5 (#183)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5-Max | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1337 | 1289 |
| Confabulations | 21.8% | — |
Multilingual Qwen2.5-Max leads
Qwen2.5-Max: 48.1 (#146), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 41.9 (#201)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5-Max | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1352 | 1265 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1382 | 1314 |
| LMArena German | 1350 | 1231 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1300 | 1207 |
| LMArena Russian | 1353 | 1271 |
| LMArena French | 1396 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1304 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1377 | — |
Instruction Following Qwen2.5-Max leads
Qwen2.5-Max: 71.3 (#152), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 67.2 (#199)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5-Max | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1335 | 1275 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 75.3% | — |
Long Context Qwen2.5-Max leads
Qwen2.5-Max: 41.4 (#142), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 39.2 (#184)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5-Max | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1358 | 1292 |
Writing & Preference Qwen2.5-Max leads
Qwen2.5-Max: 55.4 (#146), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 49.4 (#192)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5-Max | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1367 | 1299 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1339 | 1262 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1364 | 1299 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 72.9% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 56.3% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Qwen2.5-Max better than Qwen2.5 Plus 1127?
Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.7 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is Qwen2.5-Max or Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 better for coding?
Qwen2.5-Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.8 versus 38.5 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Qwen2.5-Max and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 share?
14 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen2.5-Max has 27 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 has 14.