Noometry

Model comparison

GPT-4 vs Qwen3.6 27B

Qwen3.6 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.9 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 7 shared benchmarks.

GPT-4 OpenAI

28.9

Rank #308 Confirmed

Qwen3.6 27B Alibaba (Qwen)

41.9

Rank #112 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 7 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-4 scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.6 27B in 5 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.6 27B leads 47.5 to 10.1.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 1.1% for GPT-4 and 91.1% for Qwen3.6 27B.
  • Qwen3.6 27B is cheaper at $0.60 / $3.60 per million input/output tokens, against $30 / $60 for GPT-4.
  • Qwen3.6 27B accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 8K.
  • Qwen3.6 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GPT-4Qwen3.6 27B
ProviderOpenAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index28.941.9
Released2023-03-142026-04-22
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window8K262K
Max output8K66K
Input $ / M tokens$30$0.60
Output $ / M tokens$60$3.60
Results tracked3811

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.6 27B leads

GPT-4: 31.2 (#277), Qwen3.6 27B: 38.5 (#162)

BenchmarkGPT-4Qwen3.6 27B
SciCode—37.3%
WeirdML12.4%—
BigCodeBench Instruct46%—
LMArena Coding1254—
BigCodeBench Complete57.2%—
HumanEval+79.3%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GPT-4: —, Qwen3.6 27B: —

BenchmarkGPT-4Qwen3.6 27B
METR Time Horizons36.1%—

Reasoning Qwen3.6 27B leads

GPT-4: 17.3 (#285), Qwen3.6 27B: 24.4 (#148)

BenchmarkGPT-4Qwen3.6 27B
Chess Puzzles4%22%
Mystery Game Puzzles12%7%
DTBench62.7%78.1%
LMCA17.1%34.5%
Epoch Capabilities Index125.88146.47
CritPt—0.9%
LMArena Hard Prompts1241—
BIG-Bench Hard75.1%—
ForecastBench57.8—
HellaSwag95.3%—
WinoGrande87.5%—

Math Qwen3.6 27B leads

GPT-4: 10.1 (#304), Qwen3.6 27B: 47.5 (#56)

BenchmarkGPT-4Qwen3.6 27B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20251.1%91.1%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—35.1%
LMArena Math1269—
MATH Level 523%—
GSM8K92%—

Knowledge Qwen3.6 27B leads

GPT-4: 18.4 (#277), Qwen3.6 27B: 52.4 (#58)

BenchmarkGPT-4Qwen3.6 27B
GPQA Diamond35.7%85.9%
LMArena Expert1211—
MMLU86.4%—
TriviaQA84.8%—

Multilingual Not comparable

GPT-4: 40.8 (#210), Qwen3.6 27B: —

BenchmarkGPT-4Qwen3.6 27B
LMArena Non-English1246—
LMArena Chinese1242—
LMArena French1282—
LMArena German1251—
LMArena Japanese1209—
LMArena Korean1184—
LMArena Russian1251—
LMArena Spanish1261—

Instruction Following Not comparable

GPT-4: 65.5 (#217), Qwen3.6 27B: —

BenchmarkGPT-4Qwen3.6 27B
LMArena Instruction Following1241—

Long Context Not comparable

GPT-4: 37.7 (#207), Qwen3.6 27B: —

BenchmarkGPT-4Qwen3.6 27B
LMArena Longer Query1244—

Writing & Preference Qwen3.6 27B leads

GPT-4: 35.0 (#263), Qwen3.6 27B: 50.3 (#180)

BenchmarkGPT-4Qwen3.6 27B
LMArena Text1263—
LMArena Creative Writing1244—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing752—
EQ-Bench 4—1026
LMArena Multi-Turn1257—

Frequently asked questions

Is GPT-4 better than Qwen3.6 27B?

Qwen3.6 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.9 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, GPT-4 or Qwen3.6 27B?

Qwen3.6 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.60 per million input tokens and $3.60 per million output tokens; GPT-4 lists at $30 and $60.

Is GPT-4 or Qwen3.6 27B better for coding?

Qwen3.6 27B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.5 versus 31.2 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.6 27B does, with 262K tokens against 8K.

How many benchmarks do GPT-4 and Qwen3.6 27B share?

7 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-4 has 38 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 27B has 11.

Related comparisons

Go deeper