Model comparison
GPT-5.4 nano vs Qwen3.8 Max
Qwen3.8 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 41.9 on the Noometry Index. GPT-5.4 nano costs 6.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.8 Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 31 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 31 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5.4 nano scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.8 Max in 9 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.8 Max leads 73.2 to 40.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ProofBench: 5% for GPT-5.4 nano and 58% for Qwen3.8 Max.
- GPT-5.4 nano is cheaper at $0.20 / $1.25 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $6 for Qwen3.8 Max.
- Qwen3.8 Max accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 400K.
Side by side
| GPT-5.4 nano | Qwen3.8 Max | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 41.9 | 56.8 |
| Released | 2026-03-17 | 2026-08-02 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 400K | 1M |
| Max output | 128K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.20 | $2 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $1.25 | $6 |
| Results tracked | 40 | 39 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3.8 Max leads
GPT-5.4 nano: 43.6 (#84), Qwen3.8 Max: 53.5 (#29)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 nano | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 46.9% | 53.2% |
| LMArena Coding | 1405 | 1502 |
| DeepSWE | — | 57.5% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1674 |
| FrontierSWE | — | 17.8% |
| WeirdML | 49.2% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,005 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GPT-5.4 nano: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 45.4 (#14)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 nano | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 63.3% |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 55.1% |
| GDP.pdf | — | 23.2% |
Reasoning Qwen3.8 Max leads
GPT-5.4 nano: 23.7 (#173), Qwen3.8 Max: 54.4 (#26)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 nano | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 9.3% | 20% |
| Chess Puzzles | 30% | 40% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1381 | 1496 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 9% | 38% |
| DTBench | 80.3% | 92% |
| LMCA | 36.9% | 46.2% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 145.81 | 156.41 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 5.7% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 39.7% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 88.3% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 51.5% | — |
| ForecastBench | 57.3 | — |
Math Qwen3.8 Max leads
GPT-5.4 nano: 40.9 (#88), Qwen3.8 Max: 73.2 (#20)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 nano | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 44.9% | 74.7% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 12.2% | 46.3% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 87.8% | 100% |
| ProofBench | 5% | 58% |
| LMArena Math | 1406 | 1499 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 25.9% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 6.3% | — |
Knowledge Qwen3.8 Max leads
GPT-5.4 nano: 41.9 (#103), Qwen3.8 Max: 61.7 (#27)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 nano | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 78.5% | 92.7% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 11.7% | 47.3% |
| LMArena Expert | 1396 | 1507 |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 3.1% | — |
Multimodal Too close to call
GPT-5.4 nano: 36.7 (#78), Qwen3.8 Max: 37.2 (#75)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 nano | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1196 | 1314 |
| Furniture Assembly | — | 20% |
Multilingual Qwen3.8 Max leads
GPT-5.4 nano: 48.6 (#140), Qwen3.8 Max: 56.7 (#18)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 nano | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1359 | 1472 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1392 | 1538 |
| LMArena French | 1396 | 1503 |
| LMArena German | 1367 | 1483 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1343 | 1467 |
| LMArena Korean | 1320 | 1461 |
| LMArena Russian | 1363 | 1481 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1371 | 1492 |
Instruction Following Qwen3.8 Max leads
GPT-5.4 nano: 71.9 (#144), Qwen3.8 Max: 77.6 (#17)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 nano | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1362 | 1479 |
Long Context Qwen3.8 Max leads
GPT-5.4 nano: 41.6 (#137), Qwen3.8 Max: 45.6 (#31)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 nano | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1366 | 1489 |
Writing & Preference Qwen3.8 Max leads
GPT-5.4 nano: 55.7 (#142), Qwen3.8 Max: 67.1 (#30)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 nano | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1372 | 1483 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1314 | 1479 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1382 | 1489 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-5.4 nano better than Qwen3.8 Max?
Qwen3.8 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 41.9 on the Noometry Index. GPT-5.4 nano costs 6.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.8 Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GPT-5.4 nano or Qwen3.8 Max?
GPT-5.4 nano is cheaper. It lists at $0.20 per million input tokens and $1.25 per million output tokens; Qwen3.8 Max lists at $2 and $6.
Is GPT-5.4 nano or Qwen3.8 Max better for coding?
Qwen3.8 Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.5 versus 43.6 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3.8 Max does, with 1M tokens against 400K.
How many benchmarks do GPT-5.4 nano and Qwen3.8 Max share?
31 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.4 nano has 40 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.8 Max has 39.