Model comparison

Qwen3-1.7B vs Qwen3.5-Flash

Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.5 to 26.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.

Qwen3-1.7B Alibaba (Qwen)

26.6

Rank #336 Reported

Qwen3.5-Flash Alibaba (Qwen)

42.5

Rank #112 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen3-1.7B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.5-Flash in 3 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.5-Flash leads 43.2 to 19.6.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 8.1% for Qwen3-1.7B and 84.4% for Qwen3.5-Flash.
  • Qwen3-1.7B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Qwen3-1.7B and Qwen3.5-Flash specifications
Qwen3-1.7BQwen3.5-Flash
ProviderAlibaba (Qwen)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index26.642.5
Released2025-04-292026-02-23
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window—1M
Max output—66K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.10
Output $ / M tokens—$0.40
Results tracked432

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Qwen3-1.7B: —, Qwen3.5-Flash: 34.2 (#242)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3-1.7BQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena WebDev—1244
LMArena Coding—1412
ALE-Bench—221.8

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Qwen3-1.7B: 24.7 (#115), Qwen3.5-Flash: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3-1.7BQwen3.5-Flash
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard28.4%—
Vending-Bench 2—462.69

Reasoning Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Qwen3-1.7B: 19.2 (#267), Qwen3.5-Flash: 33.7 (#72)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3-1.7BQwen3.5-Flash
Chess Puzzles0%21%
LMArena Hard Prompts—1403
Mystery Game Puzzles—20%
DTBench—82.9%
LMCA—29.1%
Epoch Capabilities Index—143.98

Math Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Qwen3-1.7B: 16.3 (#294), Qwen3.5-Flash: 37.4 (#158)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3-1.7BQwen3.5-Flash
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20258.1%84.4%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—18.2%
LMArena Math—1407
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—6.2%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—0%

Knowledge Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Qwen3-1.7B: 19.6 (#278), Qwen3.5-Flash: 43.2 (#93)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3-1.7BQwen3.5-Flash
GPQA Diamond38%82.3%
SimpleQA Verified—20.3%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—10.5%
LMArena Expert—1407

Multilingual Not comparable

Qwen3-1.7B: —, Qwen3.5-Flash: 50.5 (#121)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3-1.7BQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Non-English—1385
LMArena Chinese—1446
LMArena French—1412
LMArena German—1390
LMArena Japanese—1368
LMArena Korean—1344
LMArena Russian—1379
LMArena Spanish—1400

Instruction Following Not comparable

Qwen3-1.7B: —, Qwen3.5-Flash: 72.6 (#139)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3-1.7BQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Instruction Following—1374

Long Context Not comparable

Qwen3-1.7B: —, Qwen3.5-Flash: 42.4 (#124)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3-1.7BQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Longer Query—1392

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Qwen3-1.7B: —, Qwen3.5-Flash: 57.9 (#122)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3-1.7BQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text—1397
LMArena Creative Writing—1343
LMArena Multi-Turn—1393

Frequently asked questions

Is Qwen3-1.7B better than Qwen3.5-Flash?

Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.5 to 26.6 on the Noometry Index.

How many benchmarks do Qwen3-1.7B and Qwen3.5-Flash share?

3 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen3-1.7B has 4 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5-Flash has 32.

Related comparisons

Go deeper