Model comparison

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 vs Qwen3.8 Max

Qwen3.8 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 Alibaba (Qwen)

38.8

Rank #181 Confirmed

Qwen3.8 Max Alibaba (Qwen)

56.8

Rank #22 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 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 73.2 to 36.1.

Side by side

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 and Qwen3.8 Max specifications
Qwen2.5 Plus 1127Qwen3.8 Max
ProviderAlibaba (Qwen)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index38.856.8
Released—2026-08-02
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window—1M
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$2
Output $ / M tokens—$6
Results tracked1439

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.8 Max leads

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 38.5 (#175), Qwen3.8 Max: 53.5 (#29)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 Plus 1127Qwen3.8 Max
LMArena Coding13141502
DeepSWE—57.5%
LMArena WebDev—1674
FrontierSWE—17.8%
SciCode—53.2%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 45.4 (#14)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 Plus 1127Qwen3.8 Max
APEX-Agents—63.3%
τ²-bench Banking—55.1%
GDP.pdf—23.2%

Reasoning Qwen3.8 Max leads

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 25.9 (#141), Qwen3.8 Max: 54.4 (#26)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 Plus 1127Qwen3.8 Max
LMArena Hard Prompts12991496
NYT Connections (extended)—88.3%
CritPt—20%
Chess Puzzles—40%
Mystery Game Puzzles—38%
DTBench—92%
LMCA—46.2%
Epoch Capabilities Index—156.41

Math Qwen3.8 Max leads

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 36.1 (#174), Qwen3.8 Max: 73.2 (#20)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 Plus 1127Qwen3.8 Max
LMArena Math12981499
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—74.7%
FrontierMath Tier 4—46.3%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—100%
ProofBench—58%

Knowledge Qwen3.8 Max leads

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 35.5 (#183), Qwen3.8 Max: 61.7 (#27)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 Plus 1127Qwen3.8 Max
LMArena Expert12891507
GPQA Diamond—92.7%
SimpleQA Verified—47.3%

Multimodal Not comparable

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 37.2 (#75)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 Plus 1127Qwen3.8 Max
LMArena Vision—1314
Furniture Assembly—20%

Multilingual Qwen3.8 Max leads

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 41.9 (#201), Qwen3.8 Max: 56.7 (#18)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 Plus 1127Qwen3.8 Max
LMArena Non-English12651472
LMArena Chinese13141538
LMArena German12311483
LMArena Japanese12071467
LMArena Russian12711481
LMArena French—1503
LMArena Korean—1461
LMArena Spanish—1492

Instruction Following Qwen3.8 Max leads

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 67.2 (#199), Qwen3.8 Max: 77.6 (#17)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 Plus 1127Qwen3.8 Max
LMArena Instruction Following12751479

Long Context Qwen3.8 Max leads

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 39.2 (#184), Qwen3.8 Max: 45.6 (#31)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 Plus 1127Qwen3.8 Max
LMArena Longer Query12921489

Writing & Preference Qwen3.8 Max leads

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 49.4 (#192), Qwen3.8 Max: 67.1 (#30)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 Plus 1127Qwen3.8 Max
LMArena Text12991483
LMArena Creative Writing12621479
LMArena Multi-Turn12991489

Frequently asked questions

Is Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 better than Qwen3.8 Max?

Qwen3.8 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.

Is Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 or Qwen3.8 Max better for coding?

Qwen3.8 Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.5 versus 38.5 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 and Qwen3.8 Max share?

14 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 has 14 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.8 Max has 39.

Related comparisons

Go deeper