Model comparison
Qwen2.5-Max vs Solar Pro4
Solar Pro4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.1 to 40.7 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)
UpstageSummary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen2.5-Max scores higher in 1 category and Solar Pro4 in 7 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Solar Pro4 leads 39.8 to 35.3.
Side by side
| Qwen2.5-Max | Solar Pro4 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Upstage |
| Noometry Index | 40.7 | 42.1 |
| Released | 2025-01-25 | 2026-08-06 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 524K |
| Max output | — | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.30 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $1.20 |
| Results tracked | 27 | 18 |
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), Solar Pro4: 40.1 (#149)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5-Max | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1359 | 1437 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1371 |
| LiveBench Coding | 64.4% | — |
Reasoning Solar Pro4 leads
Qwen2.5-Max: 25.6 (#147), Solar Pro4: 28.5 (#104)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5-Max | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1360 | 1399 |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 51.4% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 67.9% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 132.53 | — |
| LiveBench | 62.3% | — |
Math Solar Pro4 leads
Qwen2.5-Max: 36.9 (#162), Solar Pro4: 38.8 (#128)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5-Max | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1369 | 1416 |
| LiveBench Math | 58.4% | — |
Knowledge Solar Pro4 leads
Qwen2.5-Max: 35.3 (#186), Solar Pro4: 39.8 (#129)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5-Max | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1337 | 1427 |
| Confabulations | 21.8% | — |
Multilingual Too close to call
Qwen2.5-Max: 48.1 (#146), Solar Pro4: 48.7 (#139)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5-Max | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1352 | 1361 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1382 | 1415 |
| LMArena French | 1396 | 1397 |
| LMArena German | 1350 | 1364 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1300 | 1309 |
| LMArena Korean | 1304 | 1382 |
| LMArena Russian | 1353 | 1360 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1377 | 1401 |
Instruction Following Solar Pro4 leads
Qwen2.5-Max: 71.3 (#152), Solar Pro4: 72.7 (#132)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5-Max | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1335 | 1377 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 75.3% | — |
Long Context Too close to call
Qwen2.5-Max: 41.4 (#142), Solar Pro4: 42.1 (#130)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5-Max | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1358 | 1381 |
Writing & Preference Solar Pro4 leads
Qwen2.5-Max: 55.4 (#146), Solar Pro4: 56.5 (#138)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5-Max | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1367 | 1386 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1339 | 1316 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1364 | 1385 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 72.9% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 56.3% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Qwen2.5-Max better than Solar Pro4?
Solar Pro4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.1 to 40.7 on the Noometry Index.
Is Qwen2.5-Max or Solar Pro4 better for coding?
Qwen2.5-Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.8 versus 40.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Qwen2.5-Max and Solar Pro4 share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen2.5-Max has 27 scored results on Noometry and Solar Pro4 has 18.