Model comparison

GPT-5.1 vs Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct

GPT-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.0 to 43.0 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct costs 3.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 23 shared benchmarks.

GPT-5.1 OpenAI

49.0

Rank #53 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 23 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5.1 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where GPT-5.1 leads 52.2 to 38.8.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is MMLU-Pro: 57.9% for GPT-5.1 and 78.6% for Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct.
  • Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct is cheaper at $0.50 / $2 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $10 for GPT-5.1.
  • GPT-5.1 accepts more context: 400K tokens versus 131K.
  • Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GPT-5.1 and Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct specifications
GPT-5.1Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct
ProviderOpenAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index49.043.0
Released2025-11-132025-09
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window400K131K
Max output128K33K
Input $ / M tokens$1.25$0.50
Output $ / M tokens$10$2
Results tracked6325

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

Category by category

Coding GPT-5.1 leads

GPT-5.1: 46.4 (#66), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 42.5 (#98)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.1Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct
LMArena Coding14541440
SWE-bench Verified68%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)66%—
LMArena WebDev1395—
SciCode43.3%—
GSO13.7%—
WeirdML60.8%—
LiveBench Coding72.5%—
ALE-Bench1,192—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GPT-5.1: 32.7 (#60), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.1Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct
Terminal-Bench47.6%—
DeepResearch Bench42.8%—
LMArena Search1199—
Vending-Bench 21,473—

Reasoning GPT-5.1 leads

GPT-5.1: 39.8 (#58), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 31.1 (#81)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.1Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct
LMArena Hard Prompts14571428
ARC-AGI-217.6%—
SimpleBench53.2%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark—66.7%
ARC-AGI-172.8%—
CritPt4.9%—
Chess Puzzles32%—
EnigmaEval11.2%—
LiveBench Reasoning95.8%—
Mystery Game Puzzles19%—
DTBench90.1%—
LiveBench Data Analysis72.1%—
LMCA43.9%—
Epoch Capabilities Index149.64—
ForecastBench58.1—
LiveBench78.8%—

Math GPT-5.1 leads

GPT-5.1: 52.2 (#51), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 38.8 (#126)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.1Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct
Omni-MATH46.4%46.7%
LMArena Math14471440
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202588.6%—
LiveBench Math94.5%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)31%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)12.5%—

Knowledge GPT-5.1 leads

GPT-5.1: 50.6 (#71), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 41.8 (#106)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.1Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct
MMLU-Pro57.9%78.6%
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.9%9.3%
GPQA (HELM)44.2%63%
LMArena Expert14701417
GPQA Diamond87.6%—
Humanity's Last Exam23.7%—
SimpleQA Verified48%—

Multimodal Not comparable

GPT-5.1: 44.8 (#19), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.1Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct
LMArena Vision1250—
VPCT58.7%—
LMArena Document1403—

Multilingual GPT-5.1 leads

GPT-5.1: 53.8 (#56), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 52.1 (#93)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.1Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct
LMArena Non-English14311407
LMArena Chinese14951460
LMArena French14501413
LMArena German14381417
LMArena Japanese14531395
LMArena Korean14011364
LMArena Russian14351404
LMArena Spanish14331435

Instruction Following GPT-5.1 leads

GPT-5.1: 83.9 (#1), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 70.8 (#159)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.1Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct
IFEval93.5%81%
LMArena Instruction Following14431389
LiveBench Instruction Following93.3%—

Long Context GPT-5.1 leads

GPT-5.1: 47.6 (#14), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 37.0 (#223)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.1Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct
LMArena Longer Query14471403
Fiction.LiveBench—55.6%
CL-bench23.7%—
CL-bench Life17.3%—

Writing & Preference GPT-5.1 leads

GPT-5.1: 64.5 (#55), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 58.0 (#121)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.1Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct
LMArena Text14431417
LMArena Creative Writing14271334
WildBench86.3%80.7%
LMArena Multi-Turn14501416
LiveBench Language80.2%—

Frequently asked questions

Is GPT-5.1 better than Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct?

GPT-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.0 to 43.0 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct costs 3.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.1 or Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct?

Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct is cheaper. It lists at $0.50 per million input tokens and $2 per million output tokens; GPT-5.1 lists at $1.25 and $10.

Is GPT-5.1 or Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct better for coding?

GPT-5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 46.4 versus 42.5 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

GPT-5.1 does, with 400K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do GPT-5.1 and Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct share?

23 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.1 has 63 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct has 25.

Related comparisons

Go deeper