Model comparison
GPT-5.4 Pro vs Qwen3.6 Flash
GPT-5.4 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.9 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.6 Flash costs 160× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.4 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 8 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 8 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5.4 Pro scores higher in 3 categories and Qwen3.6 Flash in 0 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where GPT-5.4 Pro leads 70.7 to 29.0.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3): 82.5% for GPT-5.4 Pro and 22.5% for Qwen3.6 Flash.
- Qwen3.6 Flash is cheaper at $0.19 / $1.13 per million input/output tokens, against $30 / $180 for GPT-5.4 Pro.
- GPT-5.4 Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.
Side by side
| GPT-5.4 Pro | Qwen3.6 Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 58.9 | 38.8 |
| Released | 2026-03-05 | 2026-04-27 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1.05M | 1M |
| Max output | 128K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $30 | $0.19 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $180 | $1.13 |
| Results tracked | 16 | 13 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
GPT-5.4 Pro: 43.2 (#90), Qwen3.6 Flash: —
Reasoning GPT-5.4 Pro leads
GPT-5.4 Pro: 70.7 (#13), Qwen3.6 Flash: 29.0 (#96)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleBench | 74.1% | 35.2% |
| Chess Puzzles | 58.6% | 20% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 158.93 | 143.26 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 83.3% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 94.5% | — |
| CritPt | 30% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 23.8% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 18% |
| DTBench | — | 77.1% |
| LMCA | — | 31% |
Math GPT-5.4 Pro leads
GPT-5.4 Pro: 72.4 (#22), Qwen3.6 Flash: 39.0 (#117)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 82.5% | 22.5% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 50% | 10.3% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 37.5% | 0% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 58.5% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 84.4% |
Knowledge GPT-5.4 Pro leads
GPT-5.4 Pro: 68.3 (#7), Qwen3.6 Flash: 42.1 (#100)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 Pro | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 94.6% | 83.3% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 46.3% | 15.9% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 44.3% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 8.3% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-5.4 Pro better than Qwen3.6 Flash?
GPT-5.4 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.9 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.6 Flash costs 160× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.4 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GPT-5.4 Pro or Qwen3.6 Flash?
Qwen3.6 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.19 per million input tokens and $1.13 per million output tokens; GPT-5.4 Pro lists at $30 and $180.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-5.4 Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.
How many benchmarks do GPT-5.4 Pro and Qwen3.6 Flash share?
8 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.4 Pro has 16 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Flash has 13.