# Mistral Nemo vs Qwen3.5 Plus

> Qwen3.5 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.3 to 25.9 on the Noometry Index. Mistral Nemo costs 6.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.5 Plus's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/mistral-nemo-vs-qwen3-5-plus
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 3

## Summary

- They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. Mistral Nemo scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.5 Plus in 3 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.5 Plus leads 46.0 to 12.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 29.9% for Mistral Nemo and 84.8% for Qwen3.5 Plus.
- Mistral Nemo is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.15 per million input/output tokens, against $0.40 / $2.40 for Qwen3.5 Plus.
- Qwen3.5 Plus accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.
- Mistral Nemo has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Mistral Nemo | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Mistral AI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 25.9 | 42.3 |
| Rank | 332 | 103 |
| Context | 128K | 1M |
| Input $/M | $0.15 | $0.40 |
| Output $/M | $0.15 | $2.40 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Mistral Nemo: —
- Qwen3.5 Plus: —

| Benchmark | Mistral Nemo | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| ALE-Bench | — | 621.92 |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Mistral Nemo: 23.3 (#118)
- Qwen3.5 Plus: —

| Benchmark | Mistral Nemo | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 27.6% | — |
| BALROG | 17.6% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 0.54 |

## Reasoning

- Mistral Nemo: 19.9 (#230)
- Qwen3.5 Plus: 32.0 (#67)

| Benchmark | Mistral Nemo | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| DTBench | 48.6% | 80.5% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 118.63 | 146.79 |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 22% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 17% |
| LMCA | — | 36.4% |
| PIQA | 83.5% | — |

## Math

- Mistral Nemo: 23.5 (#263)
- Qwen3.5 Plus: 47.9 (#55)

| Benchmark | Mistral Nemo | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 86.7% |
| MATH Level 5 | 10.8% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 21% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 2.1% |
| GSM8K | 84.2% | — |

## Knowledge

- Mistral Nemo: 12.3 (#293)
- Qwen3.5 Plus: 46.0 (#78)

| Benchmark | Mistral Nemo | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 29.9% | 84.8% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 25.4% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 10.7% |
| BoolQ | 82.5% | — |

## Long Context

- Mistral Nemo: —
- Qwen3.5 Plus: 42.9 (#109)

| Benchmark | Mistral Nemo | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| CL-bench | — | 19.8% |
| CL-bench Life | — | 12.4% |

## Writing & Preference

- Mistral Nemo: 28.6 (#291)
- Qwen3.5 Plus: —

| Benchmark | Mistral Nemo | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 881 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Mistral Nemo better than Qwen3.5 Plus?

Qwen3.5 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.3 to 25.9 on the Noometry Index. Mistral Nemo costs 6.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.5 Plus's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Mistral Nemo or Qwen3.5 Plus?

Mistral Nemo is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5 Plus lists at $0.40 and $2.40.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.5 Plus does, with 1M tokens against 128K.

### How many benchmarks do Mistral Nemo and Qwen3.5 Plus share?

3 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mistral Nemo has 10 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 Plus has 15.