Model comparison

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 vs Qwen3.5-Flash

Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.3 to 38.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 Alibaba (Qwen)

38.1

Rank #179 Confirmed

Qwen3.5-Flash Alibaba (Qwen)

42.3

Rank #105 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.5-Flash in 7 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen3.5-Flash leads 58.2 to 49.5.

Side by side

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 and Qwen3.5-Flash specifications
Qwen2.5 Plus 1127Qwen3.5-Flash
ProviderAlibaba (Qwen)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index38.142.3
Released—2026-02-23
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window—1M
Max output—66K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.10
Output $ / M tokens—$0.40
Results tracked1432

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: 37.9 (#171), Qwen3.5-Flash: 33.9 (#234)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 Plus 1127Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Coding13141412
LMArena WebDev—1243
ALE-Bench—221.8

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: —, Qwen3.5-Flash: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 Plus 1127Qwen3.5-Flash
Vending-Bench 2—462.69

Reasoning Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 24.8 (#139), Qwen3.5-Flash: 32.9 (#63)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 Plus 1127Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Hard Prompts12991404
Chess Puzzles—21%
Mystery Game Puzzles—20%
DTBench—82.9%
LMCA—29.1%
Epoch Capabilities Index—143.98

Math Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 33.5 (#175), Qwen3.5-Flash: 36.3 (#117)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 Plus 1127Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Math12981407
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—18.2%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—84.4%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—6.2%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—0%

Knowledge Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 34.9 (#179), Qwen3.5-Flash: 43.2 (#84)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 Plus 1127Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Expert12891408
GPQA Diamond—82.3%
SimpleQA Verified—20.3%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—10.5%

Multilingual Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 42.1 (#196), Qwen3.5-Flash: 50.7 (#116)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 Plus 1127Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Non-English12651385
LMArena Chinese13141446
LMArena German12311389
LMArena Japanese12071369
LMArena Russian12711379
LMArena French—1412
LMArena Korean—1344
LMArena Spanish—1399

Instruction Following Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 67.4 (#194), Qwen3.5-Flash: 72.8 (#133)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 Plus 1127Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Instruction Following12751374

Long Context Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 39.2 (#180), Qwen3.5-Flash: 42.4 (#119)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 Plus 1127Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Longer Query12921392

Writing & Preference Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 49.5 (#186), Qwen3.5-Flash: 58.2 (#117)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 Plus 1127Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text12991397
LMArena Creative Writing12621343
LMArena Multi-Turn12991393

Frequently asked questions

Is Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 better than Qwen3.5-Flash?

Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.3 to 38.1 on the Noometry Index.

Is Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 or Qwen3.5-Flash better for coding?

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.9 versus 33.9 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 and Qwen3.5-Flash share?

14 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 has 14 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5-Flash has 32.

Related comparisons

Go deeper