Noometry

Model comparison

o4-mini vs Qwen1.5-7B

o4-mini is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.6 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

o4-mini OpenAI

41.6

Rank #119 Confirmed

Qwen1.5-7B Alibaba (Qwen)

30.8

Rank #270 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. o4-mini scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen1.5-7B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where o4-mini leads 54.2 to 29.8.
  • Qwen1.5-7B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

o4-miniQwen1.5-7B
ProviderOpenAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index41.630.8
Released2025-04-162024-02-04
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window200K—
Max output100K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.10—
Output $ / M tokens$4.40—
Results tracked6013

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

Category by category

Coding o4-mini leads

o4-mini: 41.6 (#110), Qwen1.5-7B: 31.6 (#271)

Benchmarko4-miniQwen1.5-7B
LMArena Coding13691107
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)45%—
Aider Polyglot72%—
GSO3.6%—
WeirdML52.6%—
CadEval62%—
ALE-Bench826.17—
AlgoTune1.72—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

o4-mini: 32.3 (#57), Qwen1.5-7B: —

Benchmarko4-miniQwen1.5-7B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard53.2%—
GDPval25.3%—
METR Time Horizons63.9%—

Reasoning o4-mini leads

o4-mini: 24.6 (#143), Qwen1.5-7B: 19.5 (#237)

Benchmarko4-miniQwen1.5-7B
LMArena Hard Prompts13511066
ARC-AGI-26.1%—
SimpleBench38.7%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark67.6%—
ARC-AGI-158.7%—
CritPt0.6%—
Chess Puzzles26%—
EnigmaEval9.2%—
Mystery Game Puzzles5%—
DTBench77.6%—
LMCA26.5%—
Epoch Capabilities Index145.63—
ForecastBench61.8—

Math o4-mini leads

o4-mini: 40.2 (#79), Qwen1.5-7B: 29.0 (#222)

Benchmarko4-miniQwen1.5-7B
LMArena Math13901080
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)36.1%—
FrontierMath Tier 44.9%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202581.7%—
Omni-MATH72%—
MATH Level 597.8%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)24.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)6.3%—

Knowledge o4-mini leads

o4-mini: 43.5 (#83), Qwen1.5-7B: 28.2 (#239)

Benchmarko4-miniQwen1.5-7B
LMArena Expert13441055
GPQA Diamond79.6%—
Humanity's Last Exam18.1%—
SimpleQA Verified19.6%—
MMLU-Pro82%—
Confabulations15.8%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate18.6%—
GPQA (HELM)73.5%—
MMLU—62.6%

Multimodal Not comparable

o4-mini: 39.5 (#46), Qwen1.5-7B: —

Benchmarko4-miniQwen1.5-7B
LMArena Vision1194—
GeoBench64%—
VPCT57.5%—

Multilingual o4-mini leads

o4-mini: 47.2 (#149), Qwen1.5-7B: 28.6 (#266)

Benchmarko4-miniQwen1.5-7B
LMArena Non-English13361058
LMArena Chinese13551140
LMArena Russian13341006
LMArena French1362—
LMArena German1336—
LMArena Japanese1308—
LMArena Korean1313—
LMArena Spanish1346—

Instruction Following o4-mini leads

o4-mini: 75.4 (#63), Qwen1.5-7B: 54.4 (#276)

Benchmarko4-miniQwen1.5-7B
LMArena Instruction Following13211058
IFEval92.8%—

Long Context o4-mini leads

o4-mini: 45.5 (#31), Qwen1.5-7B: 33.1 (#261)

Benchmarko4-miniQwen1.5-7B
LMArena Longer Query13151090
Fiction.LiveBench77.8%—

Writing & Preference o4-mini leads

o4-mini: 54.2 (#148), Qwen1.5-7B: 29.8 (#288)

Benchmarko4-miniQwen1.5-7B
LMArena Text13531084
LMArena Creative Writing12941035
LMArena Multi-Turn13501061
Short-Story Creative Writing75%—
WildBench85.4%—

Frequently asked questions

Is o4-mini better than Qwen1.5-7B?

o4-mini is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.6 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.

Is o4-mini or Qwen1.5-7B better for coding?

o4-mini scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.6 versus 31.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do o4-mini and Qwen1.5-7B share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. o4-mini has 60 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-7B has 13.

Related comparisons

Go deeper