Model comparison
o1-mini vs Qwen2.5-Max
Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.1 to 33.7 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 27 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 27 benchmarks with published results for both. o1-mini scores higher in 1 category and Qwen2.5-Max in 7 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen2.5-Max leads 24.6 to 8.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is LiveBench Reasoning: 72.3% for o1-mini and 51.4% for Qwen2.5-Max.
Side by side
| o1-mini | Qwen2.5-Max | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 33.7 | 40.1 |
| Released | 2024-09-12 | 2025-01-25 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 39 | 27 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen2.5-Max leads
o1-mini: 35.1 (#218), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.2 (#118)
| Benchmark | o1-mini | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Coding | 48% | 64.4% |
| LMArena Coding | 1362 | 1359 |
| Aider Polyglot | 32.9% | — |
| WeirdML | 36.3% | — |
| HumanEval+ | 89% | — |
| MBPP+ | 78.8% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
o1-mini: 24.3 (#112), Qwen2.5-Max: —
| Benchmark | o1-mini | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| Cybench | 10% | — |
Reasoning Qwen2.5-Max leads
o1-mini: 8.9 (#340), Qwen2.5-Max: 24.6 (#144)
| Benchmark | o1-mini | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Reasoning | 72.3% | 51.4% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1333 | 1360 |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 57.9% | 67.9% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.82 | 132.54 |
| LiveBench | 57.8% | 62.3% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 0.8% | — |
| SimpleBench | 18.1% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 14% | — |
Math Too close to call
o1-mini: 33.7 (#168), Qwen2.5-Max: 34.3 (#162)
| Benchmark | o1-mini | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Math | 62% | 58.4% |
| LMArena Math | 1358 | 1369 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 46.9% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 89.2% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 1.7% | — |
Knowledge Too close to call
o1-mini: 34.8 (#180), Qwen2.5-Max: 34.8 (#181)
| Benchmark | o1-mini | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| Confabulations | 18.6% | 21.8% |
| LMArena Expert | 1316 | 1337 |
| GPQA Diamond | 62.4% | — |
Multilingual Qwen2.5-Max leads
o1-mini: 43.8 (#177), Qwen2.5-Max: 48.3 (#140)
| Benchmark | o1-mini | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1289 | 1352 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1314 | 1382 |
| LMArena French | 1292 | 1396 |
| LMArena German | 1278 | 1350 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1245 | 1299 |
| LMArena Korean | 1223 | 1304 |
| LMArena Russian | 1283 | 1353 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1302 | 1377 |
Instruction Following Qwen2.5-Max leads
o1-mini: 67.0 (#200), Qwen2.5-Max: 71.5 (#147)
| Benchmark | o1-mini | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 65.4% | 75.3% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1304 | 1335 |
Long Context Qwen2.5-Max leads
o1-mini: 40.1 (#156), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.3 (#137)
| Benchmark | o1-mini | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1321 | 1358 |
Writing & Preference Qwen2.5-Max leads
o1-mini: 48.6 (#196), Qwen2.5-Max: 55.6 (#141)
| Benchmark | o1-mini | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1317 | 1367 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1244 | 1339 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 64.9% | 72.9% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1314 | 1364 |
| LiveBench Language | 40.9% | 56.3% |
Frequently asked questions
Is o1-mini better than Qwen2.5-Max?
Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.1 to 33.7 on the Noometry Index.
Is o1-mini or Qwen2.5-Max better for coding?
Qwen2.5-Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.2 versus 35.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do o1-mini and Qwen2.5-Max share?
27 benchmarks have published results for both models. o1-mini has 39 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Max has 27.