Model comparison
GPT-6 Sol vs Qwen Plus
GPT-6 Sol is the stronger model overall, scoring 61.8 to 37.1 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Plus costs 6.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-6 Sol's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-6 Sol scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen Plus in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where GPT-6 Sol leads 87.2 to 23.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 100% for GPT-6 Sol and 17.8% for Qwen Plus.
- Qwen Plus is cheaper at $0.40 / $1.20 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $10 for GPT-6 Sol.
- GPT-6 Sol accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.
Side by side
| GPT-6 Sol | Qwen Plus | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 61.8 | 37.1 |
| Released | 2026-09-22 | 2024-01-25 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1.05M | 1M |
| Max output | 128K | 33K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $2 | $0.40 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $10 | $1.20 |
| Results tracked | 45 | 20 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GPT-6 Sol leads
GPT-6 Sol: 60.1 (#11), Qwen Plus: 38.9 (#167)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Sol | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1447 | 1328 |
| DeepSWE | 68.8% | — |
| FrontierCode | 49.3% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1688 | — |
| SciCode | 57.6% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 2,462 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GPT-6 Sol: 37.2 (#36), Qwen Plus: —
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Sol | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 54.3% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 26.4% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 14,428 | — |
Reasoning GPT-6 Sol leads
GPT-6 Sol: 74.0 (#9), Qwen Plus: 28.4 (#107)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Sol | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1418 | 1317 |
| DTBench | 97.3% | 81.1% |
| LMCA | 59.1% | 24% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 89.6% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 63.3% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 90.1% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 95.5% | — |
| CritPt | 30.9% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 53.3% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 56% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 162.72 | — |
Math GPT-6 Sol leads
GPT-6 Sol: 87.2 (#7), Qwen Plus: 23.3 (#271)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Sol | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 100% | 17.8% |
| LMArena Math | 1402 | 1326 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 89.8% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 90% | — |
| ProofBench | 83% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 65.3% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 1.7% |
Knowledge GPT-6 Sol leads
GPT-6 Sol: 64.8 (#15), Qwen Plus: 27.4 (#251)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Sol | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 94.3% | 48.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1439 | 1328 |
| SimpleQA Verified | 60.7% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 6.5% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
GPT-6 Sol: 47.6 (#10), Qwen Plus: —
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Sol | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1245 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 36.9% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 58.3% | — |
Multilingual GPT-6 Sol leads
GPT-6 Sol: 50.5 (#118), Qwen Plus: 45.1 (#175)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Sol | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1385 | 1310 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1405 | 1347 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1385 | 1251 |
| LMArena Russian | 1401 | 1323 |
| LMArena French | 1410 | — |
| LMArena German | 1390 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1341 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1384 | — |
Instruction Following GPT-6 Sol leads
GPT-6 Sol: 74.5 (#94), Qwen Plus: 68.8 (#181)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Sol | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1412 | 1303 |
Long Context GPT-6 Sol leads
GPT-6 Sol: 43.1 (#108), Qwen Plus: 40.3 (#158)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Sol | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1411 | 1324 |
Writing & Preference GPT-6 Sol leads
GPT-6 Sol: 71.9 (#18), Qwen Plus: 52.2 (#176)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Sol | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1395 | 1326 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1378 | 1293 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1412 | 1336 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 2125 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-6 Sol better than Qwen Plus?
GPT-6 Sol is the stronger model overall, scoring 61.8 to 37.1 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Plus costs 6.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-6 Sol's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GPT-6 Sol or Qwen Plus?
Qwen Plus is cheaper. It lists at $0.40 per million input tokens and $1.20 per million output tokens; GPT-6 Sol lists at $2 and $10.
Is GPT-6 Sol or Qwen Plus better for coding?
GPT-6 Sol scores higher on coding benchmarks: 60.1 versus 38.9 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-6 Sol does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.
How many benchmarks do GPT-6 Sol and Qwen Plus share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-6 Sol has 45 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Plus has 20.