Model comparison
Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 vs Qwen3.5-9B
Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 33.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.5-9B leads 46.0 to 35.5.
- Qwen3.5-9B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 | Qwen3.5-9B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 38.8 | 33.8 |
| Released | — | 2026-02-23 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 262K |
| Max output | — | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.10 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.15 |
| Results tracked | 14 | 10 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads
Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 38.5 (#175), Qwen3.5-9B: 35.9 (#217)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | — | 27.5% |
| LMArena Coding | 1314 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: —, Qwen3.5-9B: 14.5 (#151)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 9.2% |
Reasoning Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads
Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 25.9 (#141), Qwen3.5-9B: 23.1 (#182)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | — | 0.3% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 12% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1299 | — |
| DTBench | — | 71.2% |
| LMCA | — | 24.5% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 139.46 |
Math Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads
Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 36.1 (#174), Qwen3.5-9B: 34.8 (#192)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 48.5% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 61.7% |
| LMArena Math | 1298 | — |
Knowledge Qwen3.5-9B leads
Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 35.5 (#183), Qwen3.5-9B: 46.0 (#84)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 79% |
| LMArena Expert | 1289 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 41.9 (#201), Qwen3.5-9B: —
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1265 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1314 | — |
| LMArena German | 1231 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1207 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1271 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 67.2 (#199), Qwen3.5-9B: —
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1275 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 39.2 (#184), Qwen3.5-9B: —
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1292 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 49.4 (#192), Qwen3.5-9B: —
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1299 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1262 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1299 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 better than Qwen3.5-9B?
Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 33.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 or Qwen3.5-9B better for coding?
Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.5 versus 35.9 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 and Qwen3.5-9B share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 has 14 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5-9B has 10.