Noometry

Model comparison

GPT-4.1 vs Qwen3.6 Flash

Qwen3.6 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.4 to 35.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

GPT-4.1 OpenAI

35.7

Rank #215 Confirmed

Qwen3.6 Flash Alibaba (Qwen)

38.4

Rank #176 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-4.1 scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.6 Flash in 3 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.6 Flash leads 38.0 to 21.4.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 38.3% for GPT-4.1 and 84.4% for Qwen3.6 Flash.
  • Qwen3.6 Flash is cheaper at $0.19 / $1.13 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $8 for GPT-4.1.
  • GPT-4.1 accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.

Side by side

GPT-4.1Qwen3.6 Flash
ProviderOpenAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index35.738.4
Released2025-04-142026-04-27
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1.05M1M
Max output33K66K
Input $ / M tokens$2$0.19
Output $ / M tokens$8$1.13
Results tracked5213

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

GPT-4.1: 34.2 (#228), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkGPT-4.1Qwen3.6 Flash
ALE-Bench558.1326.4
SWE-bench Verified48.5%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)39.6%—
Aider Polyglot52.4%—
WeirdML39%—
LMArena Coding1391—
CadEval42%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GPT-4.1: 34.4 (#40), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkGPT-4.1Qwen3.6 Flash
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard54%—

Reasoning Qwen3.6 Flash leads

GPT-4.1: 11.7 (#334), Qwen3.6 Flash: 28.4 (#90)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1Qwen3.6 Flash
SimpleBench27%35.2%
Chess Puzzles6%20%
DTBench68.3%77.1%
LMCA25.6%31%
Epoch Capabilities Index136.79143.26
ARC-AGI-20.4%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark52.3%—
ARC-AGI-15.5%—
EnigmaEval2.2%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1384—
Mystery Game Puzzles—18%
ForecastBench61.5—

Math Qwen3.6 Flash leads

GPT-4.1: 21.4 (#269), Qwen3.6 Flash: 38.0 (#88)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1Qwen3.6 Flash
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)6%22.5%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202538.3%84.4%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)5.5%10.3%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)0%0%
Omni-MATH47.1%—
LMArena Math1369—
MATH Level 583%—

Knowledge Qwen3.6 Flash leads

GPT-4.1: 37.0 (#152), Qwen3.6 Flash: 42.2 (#90)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1Qwen3.6 Flash
GPQA Diamond66.9%83.3%
SimpleQA Verified31.1%15.9%
Humanity's Last Exam5.4%—
MMLU-Pro81.1%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate5.6%—
GPQA (HELM)65.9%—
LMArena Expert1364—

Multimodal Not comparable

GPT-4.1: 37.5 (#66), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkGPT-4.1Qwen3.6 Flash
LMArena Vision1210—
GeoBench72%—

Multilingual Not comparable

GPT-4.1: 49.6 (#128), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkGPT-4.1Qwen3.6 Flash
LMArena Non-English1370—
LMArena Chinese1382—
LMArena French1383—
LMArena German1380—
LMArena Japanese1320—
LMArena Korean1339—
LMArena Russian1377—
LMArena Spanish1375—

Instruction Following Not comparable

GPT-4.1: 71.5 (#148), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkGPT-4.1Qwen3.6 Flash
IFEval83.8%—
LMArena Instruction Following1367—

Long Context Not comparable

GPT-4.1: 40.0 (#158), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkGPT-4.1Qwen3.6 Flash
Fiction.LiveBench63.9%—
LMArena Longer Query1385—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

GPT-4.1: 57.8 (#120), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkGPT-4.1Qwen3.6 Flash
LMArena Text1383—
LMArena Creative Writing1363—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1420—
WildBench85.4%—
LMArena Multi-Turn1398—

Frequently asked questions

Is GPT-4.1 better than Qwen3.6 Flash?

Qwen3.6 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.4 to 35.7 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, GPT-4.1 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-4.1 lists at $2 and $8.

Which has the bigger context window?

GPT-4.1 does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.

How many benchmarks do GPT-4.1 and Qwen3.6 Flash share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-4.1 has 52 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Flash has 13.

Related comparisons

Go deeper