Model comparison

Qwen2.5-Max vs Qwen3.8 Max

Qwen3.8 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.0 to 40.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.

Qwen2.5-Max Alibaba (Qwen)

40.1

Rank #142 Confirmed

Qwen3.8 Max Alibaba (Qwen)

56.0

Rank #21 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen2.5-Max scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.8 Max in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.8 Max leads 73.1 to 34.3.

Side by side

Qwen2.5-Max and Qwen3.8 Max specifications
Qwen2.5-MaxQwen3.8 Max
ProviderAlibaba (Qwen)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index40.156.0
Released2025-01-252026-08-02
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window—1M
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$2
Output $ / M tokens—$6
Results tracked2738

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.8 Max leads

Qwen2.5-Max: 41.2 (#118), Qwen3.8 Max: 52.3 (#30)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5-MaxQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Coding13591499
DeepSWE—57.5%
LMArena WebDev—1671
FrontierSWE—15.8%
SciCode—52.9%
LiveBench Coding64.4%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Qwen2.5-Max: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 42.6 (#17)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5-MaxQwen3.8 Max
τ²-bench Banking—55.1%
GDP.pdf—23.2%

Reasoning Qwen3.8 Max leads

Qwen2.5-Max: 24.6 (#144), Qwen3.8 Max: 53.4 (#26)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5-MaxQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Hard Prompts13601493
Epoch Capabilities Index132.54156.69
NYT Connections (extended)—88.3%
CritPt—20%
Chess Puzzles—40%
LiveBench Reasoning51.4%—
Mystery Game Puzzles—38%
DTBench—92%
LiveBench Data Analysis67.9%—
LMCA—46.2%
LiveBench62.3%—

Math Qwen3.8 Max leads

Qwen2.5-Max: 34.3 (#162), Qwen3.8 Max: 73.1 (#15)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5-MaxQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Math13691498
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—74.7%
FrontierMath Tier 4—46.3%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—100%
ProofBench—58%
LiveBench Math58.4%—

Knowledge Qwen3.8 Max leads

Qwen2.5-Max: 34.8 (#181), Qwen3.8 Max: 61.7 (#25)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5-MaxQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Expert13371504
GPQA Diamond—92.7%
SimpleQA Verified—47.3%
Confabulations21.8%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Qwen2.5-Max: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 36.9 (#70)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5-MaxQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Vision—1314
Furniture Assembly—20%

Multilingual Qwen3.8 Max leads

Qwen2.5-Max: 48.3 (#140), Qwen3.8 Max: 56.6 (#18)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5-MaxQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Non-English13521468
LMArena Chinese13821537
LMArena French13961502
LMArena German13501489
LMArena Japanese12991466
LMArena Korean13041467
LMArena Russian13531478
LMArena Spanish13771495

Instruction Following Qwen3.8 Max leads

Qwen2.5-Max: 71.5 (#147), Qwen3.8 Max: 77.7 (#19)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5-MaxQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Instruction Following13351478
LiveBench Instruction Following75.3%—

Long Context Qwen3.8 Max leads

Qwen2.5-Max: 41.3 (#137), Qwen3.8 Max: 45.5 (#30)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5-MaxQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Longer Query13581486

Writing & Preference Qwen3.8 Max leads

Qwen2.5-Max: 55.6 (#141), Qwen3.8 Max: 67.0 (#31)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5-MaxQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Text13671480
LMArena Creative Writing13391478
LMArena Multi-Turn13641487
Short-Story Creative Writing72.9%—
LiveBench Language56.3%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Qwen2.5-Max better than Qwen3.8 Max?

Qwen3.8 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.0 to 40.1 on the Noometry Index.

Is Qwen2.5-Max or Qwen3.8 Max better for coding?

Qwen3.8 Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 52.3 versus 41.2 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Qwen2.5-Max and Qwen3.8 Max share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen2.5-Max has 27 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.8 Max has 38.

Related comparisons

Go deeper