Model comparison
GPT-4 vs Qwen3.5 122B-A10B
Qwen3.5 122B-A10B is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.6 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 20 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-4 scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.5 122B-A10B in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.5 122B-A10B leads 36.4 to 10.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 62.7% for GPT-4 and 84.3% for Qwen3.5 122B-A10B.
- Qwen3.5 122B-A10B is cheaper at $0.40 / $3.20 per million input/output tokens, against $30 / $60 for GPT-4.
- Qwen3.5 122B-A10B accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 8K.
- Qwen3.5 122B-A10B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GPT-4 | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 28.9 | 41.6 |
| Released | 2023-03-14 | 2026-02-23 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 8K | 262K |
| Max output | 8K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $30 | $0.40 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $60 | $3.20 |
| Results tracked | 38 | 27 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3.5 122B-A10B leads
GPT-4: 31.2 (#277), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 38.8 (#155)
| Benchmark | GPT-4 | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1254 | 1436 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1360 |
| SciCode | — | 35.6% |
| WeirdML | 12.4% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 46% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 57.2% | — |
| HumanEval+ | 79.3% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GPT-4: —, Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: —
| Benchmark | GPT-4 | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|
| METR Time Horizons | 36.1% | — |
Reasoning Qwen3.5 122B-A10B leads
GPT-4: 17.3 (#285), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 26.4 (#121)
| Benchmark | GPT-4 | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1241 | 1421 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 12% | 17% |
| DTBench | 62.7% | 84.3% |
| LMCA | 17.1% | 32.2% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 51.7% |
| CritPt | — | 0.9% |
| Chess Puzzles | 4% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 51.2% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 75.1% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 125.88 | — |
| ForecastBench | 57.8 | — |
| HellaSwag | 95.3% | — |
| WinoGrande | 87.5% | — |
Math Qwen3.5 122B-A10B leads
GPT-4: 10.1 (#304), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 36.4 (#114)
| Benchmark | GPT-4 | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1269 | 1432 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 1.1% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 23% | — |
| GSM8K | 92% | — |
Knowledge Qwen3.5 122B-A10B leads
GPT-4: 18.4 (#277), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 38.2 (#138)
| Benchmark | GPT-4 | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1211 | 1431 |
| GPQA Diamond | 35.7% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 11.2% |
| MMLU | 86.4% | — |
| TriviaQA | 84.8% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
GPT-4: —, Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 39.0 (#52)
| Benchmark | GPT-4 | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1245 |
Multilingual Qwen3.5 122B-A10B leads
GPT-4: 40.8 (#210), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 51.8 (#101)
| Benchmark | GPT-4 | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1246 | 1400 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1242 | 1462 |
| LMArena French | 1282 | 1442 |
| LMArena German | 1251 | 1425 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1209 | 1364 |
| LMArena Korean | 1184 | 1353 |
| LMArena Russian | 1251 | 1400 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1261 | 1423 |
Instruction Following Qwen3.5 122B-A10B leads
GPT-4: 65.5 (#217), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 74.0 (#109)
| Benchmark | GPT-4 | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1241 | 1399 |
Long Context Qwen3.5 122B-A10B leads
GPT-4: 37.7 (#207), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 43.0 (#105)
| Benchmark | GPT-4 | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1244 | 1410 |
Writing & Preference Qwen3.5 122B-A10B leads
GPT-4: 35.0 (#263), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 60.2 (#98)
| Benchmark | GPT-4 | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1263 | 1417 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1244 | 1369 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1257 | 1416 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 752 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-4 better than Qwen3.5 122B-A10B?
Qwen3.5 122B-A10B is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.6 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, GPT-4 or Qwen3.5 122B-A10B?
Qwen3.5 122B-A10B is cheaper. It lists at $0.40 per million input tokens and $3.20 per million output tokens; GPT-4 lists at $30 and $60.
Is GPT-4 or Qwen3.5 122B-A10B better for coding?
Qwen3.5 122B-A10B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.8 versus 31.2 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3.5 122B-A10B does, with 262K tokens against 8K.
How many benchmarks do GPT-4 and Qwen3.5 122B-A10B share?
20 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-4 has 38 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 122B-A10B has 27.