Model comparison

GPT-5.6 Terra vs Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct

GPT-5.6 Terra is the stronger model overall, scoring 59.2 to 38.1 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct costs 1.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.6 Terra's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 21 shared benchmarks.

GPT-5.6 Terra OpenAI

59.2

Rank #17 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5.6 Terra scores higher in 9 categories and Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct in 0 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where GPT-5.6 Terra leads 81.6 to 37.6.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is WeirdML: 78.3% for GPT-5.6 Terra and 41.2% for Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct.
  • Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct is cheaper at $1.50 / $7.50 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $12 for GPT-5.6 Terra.
  • GPT-5.6 Terra accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 262K.
  • Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GPT-5.6 Terra and Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct specifications
GPT-5.6 TerraQwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
ProviderOpenAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index59.238.1
Released2026-07-092025-04
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1.05M262K
Max output128K66K
Input $ / M tokens$2$1.50
Output $ / M tokens$12$7.50
Results tracked5225

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

Category by category

Coding GPT-5.6 Terra leads

GPT-5.6 Terra: 57.7 (#19), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 35.5 (#223)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.6 TerraQwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
LMArena WebDev15221275
WeirdML78.3%41.2%
LMArena Coding14841412
ALE-Bench1,951461.45
DeepSWE69.6%—
FrontierCode41.3%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)—55.4%
CursorBench41.3%—
SciCode55%—
GSO—4.9%
AlgoTune—1.44

Agentic & Tool Use GPT-5.6 Terra leads

GPT-5.6 Terra: 40.1 (#25), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 23.9 (#123)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.6 TerraQwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
Terminal-Bench—27.2%
APEX-Agents58.2%—
BALROG53.2%—
GDP.pdf24.7%—
Vending-Bench 27,343—

Reasoning GPT-5.6 Terra leads

GPT-5.6 Terra: 60.7 (#21), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 25.5 (#149)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.6 TerraQwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
Kagi LLM Benchmark51.3%49.5%
LMArena Hard Prompts14681372
ARC-AGI-283.9%—
SimpleBench48.9%—
NYT Connections (extended)78.4%—
ARC-AGI-196.5%—
CritPt30%—
Chess Puzzles54%—
Mystery Game Puzzles35%—
DTBench93.3%—
LMCA55%—
Surface Evolver Bench83.8%—
Epoch Capabilities Index159.62—

Math GPT-5.6 Terra leads

GPT-5.6 Terra: 81.6 (#12), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 37.6 (#150)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.6 TerraQwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
LMArena Math14661365
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)86%—
FrontierMath Tier 470.7%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202599.7%—
ProofBench74%—

Knowledge GPT-5.6 Terra leads

GPT-5.6 Terra: 61.2 (#30), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 37.0 (#162)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.6 TerraQwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
LMArena Expert14921338
GPQA Diamond93.3%—
SimpleQA Verified43.2%—

Multimodal Not comparable

GPT-5.6 Terra: 47.3 (#11), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.6 TerraQwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
LMArena Vision1271—
Blueprint-Bench 230.8%—
Furniture Assembly54.2%—
LMArena Document1472—

Multilingual GPT-5.6 Terra leads

GPT-5.6 Terra: 54.4 (#44), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 47.7 (#148)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.6 TerraQwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
LMArena Non-English14391346
LMArena Chinese15131357
LMArena French14711398
LMArena German14601325
LMArena Japanese14571310
LMArena Korean14251305
LMArena Russian14501366
LMArena Spanish14481360

Instruction Following GPT-5.6 Terra leads

GPT-5.6 Terra: 76.4 (#40), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 71.6 (#147)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.6 TerraQwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following14541355

Long Context GPT-5.6 Terra leads

GPT-5.6 Terra: 44.4 (#68), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 42.0 (#131)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.6 TerraQwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
LMArena Longer Query14511378

Writing & Preference GPT-5.6 Terra leads

GPT-5.6 Terra: 70.2 (#23), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 55.3 (#147)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.6 TerraQwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
LMArena Text14471357
LMArena Creative Writing14101333
LMArena Multi-Turn14491365
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1855—
EQ-Bench 41234—

Frequently asked questions

Is GPT-5.6 Terra better than Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct?

GPT-5.6 Terra is the stronger model overall, scoring 59.2 to 38.1 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct costs 1.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.6 Terra's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.6 Terra or Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct?

Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct is cheaper. It lists at $1.50 per million input tokens and $7.50 per million output tokens; GPT-5.6 Terra lists at $2 and $12.

Is GPT-5.6 Terra or Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct better for coding?

GPT-5.6 Terra scores higher on coding benchmarks: 57.7 versus 35.5 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

GPT-5.6 Terra does, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks do GPT-5.6 Terra and Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct share?

21 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.6 Terra has 52 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct has 25.

Related comparisons

Go deeper