# GPT-4o vs Qwen2.5 7B Instruct

> GPT-4o and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct score almost the same on the Noometry Index (28.6 vs 29.0), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gpt-4o-vs-qwen2-5-7b-instruct
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 15

## Summary

- They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-4o scores higher in 3 categories and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct in 4 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where GPT-4o leads 28.8 to 17.0.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is BALROG: 32.3% for GPT-4o and 7.8% for Qwen2.5 7B Instruct.
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is cheaper at $0.17 / $0.70 per million input/output tokens, against $2.50 / $10 for GPT-4o.
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct accepts more context: 131K tokens versus 128K.
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | GPT-4o | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 28.6 | 29.0 |
| Rank | 324 | 320 |
| Context | 128K | 131K |
| Input $/M | $2.50 | $0.17 |
| Output $/M | $10 | $0.70 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- GPT-4o: 24.8 (#328)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 36.5 (#208)

| Benchmark | GPT-4o | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 51.1% | 37.6% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 61.1% | 46.1% |
| SWE-bench Verified | 31% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 21.6% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 45.3% | — |
| GSO | 0% | — |
| WeirdML | 25.1% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 51.4% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1297 | — |
| CadEval | 26% | — |
| HumanEval+ | 87.2% | — |
| MBPP+ | 72.2% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- GPT-4o: 21.0 (#141)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 23.8 (#124)

| Benchmark | GPT-4o | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| BALROG | 32.3% | 7.8% |
| GDPval | 9.9% | — |
| TheAgentCompany | 8.6% | — |
| Cybench | 12.5% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1006 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 40.8% | — |

## Reasoning

- GPT-4o: 9.4 (#343)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 14.8 (#322)

| Benchmark | GPT-4o | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 13% | 0% |
| DTBench | 64.5% | 47.7% |
| LMCA | 16.6% | 6.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 128.97 | 118.51 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 0% | — |
| SimpleBench | 17.8% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 4.5% | — |
| CritPt | 0% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 0.8% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 55.8% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1281 | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 60.9% | — |
| ForecastBench | 57.7 | — |
| LiveBench | 55.3% | — |

## Math

- GPT-4o: 10.6 (#312)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 12.6 (#306)

| Benchmark | GPT-4o | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 6.4% | 2.5% |
| Omni-MATH | 29.3% | 29.4% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 0.4% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 49.5% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1285 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 53.3% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 0.3% | — |

## Knowledge

- GPT-4o: 28.8 (#242)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 17.0 (#286)

| Benchmark | GPT-4o | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 49.2% | 35.5% |
| MMLU-Pro | 71.3% | 53.9% |
| GPQA (HELM) | 52% | 34.1% |
| MMLU | 88.1% | 72.9% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 2.7% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 26% | — |
| Confabulations | 15.3% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 9.6% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1250 | — |

## Multimodal

- GPT-4o: 34.5 (#91)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | GPT-4o | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1137 | — |
| Video-MME | 71.9% | — |
| GeoBench | 71% | — |
| VPCT | 40% | — |
| ScienceQA | 88.5% | — |

## Multilingual

- GPT-4o: 43.2 (#186)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | GPT-4o | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1283 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1277 | — |
| LMArena French | 1304 | — |
| LMArena German | 1282 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1257 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1234 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1286 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1292 | — |

## Instruction Following

- GPT-4o: 66.6 (#207)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 63.2 (#231)

| Benchmark | GPT-4o | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | 81.7% | 74.1% |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 68.6% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1278 | — |

## Long Context

- GPT-4o: 39.4 (#179)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | GPT-4o | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 66.7% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1289 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- GPT-4o: 52.6 (#166)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 48.8 (#195)

| Benchmark | GPT-4o | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| WildBench | 82.8% | 73.1% |
| LMArena Text | 1300 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1292 | — |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 81.8% | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1302 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 47.6% | — |

## FAQ

### Is GPT-4o better than Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?

GPT-4o and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct score almost the same on the Noometry Index (28.6 vs 29.0), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

### Which is cheaper, GPT-4o or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is cheaper. It lists at $0.17 per million input tokens and $0.70 per million output tokens; GPT-4o lists at $2.50 and $10.

### Is GPT-4o or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct better for coding?

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 36.5 versus 24.8 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct does, with 131K tokens against 128K.

### How many benchmarks do GPT-4o and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct share?

15 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-4o has 72 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has 15.