Model comparison
GPT-4.1 nano vs Qwen Max
Qwen Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.7 to 27.9 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4.1 nano costs 16× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 20 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-4.1 nano scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen Max in 6 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen Max leads 25.1 to 8.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Fiction.LiveBench: 25% for GPT-4.1 nano and 66.7% for Qwen Max.
- GPT-4.1 nano is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $1.60 / $6.40 for Qwen Max.
- GPT-4.1 nano accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 33K.
Side by side
| GPT-4.1 nano | Qwen Max | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 27.9 | 34.7 |
| Released | 2025-04-14 | 2024-04-03 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1.05M | 33K |
| Max output | 33K | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.10 | $1.60 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.40 | $6.40 |
| Results tracked | 38 | 23 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen Max leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 24.1 (#330), Qwen Max: 30.7 (#292)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 8.9% | 21.8% |
| LMArena Coding | 1306 | 1288 |
| SciCode | 25.9% | — |
| WeirdML | 19% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GPT-4.1 nano: 26.5 (#104), Qwen Max: —
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 33% | — |
Reasoning Qwen Max leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 8.5 (#349), Qwen Max: 25.1 (#151)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1286 | 1269 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 0% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 33.3% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 0% | — |
| CritPt | 0% | — |
| DTBench | 52.5% | — |
| LMCA | 5.5% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 129.62 | — |
Math GPT-4.1 nano leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 26.9 (#252), Qwen Max: 22.3 (#276)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 28.9% | 16.1% |
| LMArena Math | 1274 | 1275 |
| MATH Level 5 | 70% | 67.2% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 1% | 1% |
| Omni-MATH | 36.7% | — |
Knowledge Qwen Max leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 21.8 (#273), Qwen Max: 30.3 (#228)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 48.9% | 56.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1272 | 1248 |
| SimpleQA Verified | 6% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 55% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 50.7% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
GPT-4.1 nano: 29.2 (#113), Qwen Max: —
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1063 | — |
Multilingual Too close to call
GPT-4.1 nano: 41.6 (#205), Qwen Max: 41.8 (#202)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1260 | 1263 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1270 | 1254 |
| LMArena German | 1288 | 1254 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1198 | 1205 |
| LMArena Russian | 1261 | 1274 |
| LMArena French | — | 1330 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1142 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1290 |
Instruction Following GPT-4.1 nano leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 67.8 (#193), Qwen Max: 66.5 (#208)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1267 | 1262 |
| IFEval | 84.3% | — |
Long Context Qwen Max leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 23.7 (#296), Qwen Max: 39.4 (#180)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 25% | 66.7% |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1283 | 1288 |
Writing & Preference Qwen Max leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 40.5 (#243), Qwen Max: 47.8 (#205)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1285 | 1282 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1260 | 1248 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1277 | 1277 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 946 | — |
| WildBench | 81.2% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-4.1 nano better than Qwen Max?
Qwen Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.7 to 27.9 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4.1 nano costs 16× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GPT-4.1 nano or Qwen Max?
GPT-4.1 nano is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Qwen Max lists at $1.60 and $6.40.
Is GPT-4.1 nano or Qwen Max better for coding?
Qwen Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 30.7 versus 24.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-4.1 nano does, with 1.05M tokens against 33K.
How many benchmarks do GPT-4.1 nano and Qwen Max share?
20 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-4.1 nano has 38 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Max has 23.