Model comparison

GPT-5.4 vs Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct

GPT-5.4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 59.5 to 42.5 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct costs 6.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.4's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 19 shared benchmarks.

GPT-5.4 OpenAI

59.5

Rank #14 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5.4 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-5.4 leads 73.3 to 36.3.
  • Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct is cheaper at $0.50 / $2 per million input/output tokens, against $2.50 / $15 for GPT-5.4.
  • GPT-5.4 accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 131K.
  • Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GPT-5.4 and Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct specifications
GPT-5.4Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct
ProviderOpenAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index59.542.5
Released2026-03-052025-09
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1.05M131K
Max output128K33K
Input $ / M tokens$2.50$0.50
Output $ / M tokens$15$2
Results tracked6825

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

Category by category

Coding GPT-5.4 leads

GPT-5.4: 52.8 (#28), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 41.9 (#101)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.4Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct
LMArena Coding14971441
SWE-bench Verified76.9%—
DeepSWE51.8%—
LMArena WebDev1465—
SciCode56.6%—
GSO31.4%—
WeirdML77.7%—
MirrorCode15.6%—
ALE-Bench1,607—
AlgoTune1.85—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GPT-5.4: 46.5 (#12), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.4Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct
Terminal-Bench81.8%—
APEX-Agents52.4%—
τ²-bench Banking39.4%—
DeepResearch Bench35.1%—
PostTrainBench19%—
GBAEval45.1%—
LMArena Search1197—
METR Time Horizons74.3%—
Vending-Bench 26,144—

Reasoning GPT-5.4 leads

GPT-5.4: 61.7 (#17), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 30.1 (#79)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.4Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct
Kagi LLM Benchmark63.8%66.7%
LMArena Hard Prompts14851428
ARC-AGI-274%—
NYT Connections (extended)91.3%—
ARC-AGI-193.7%—
CritPt23.4%—
Chess Puzzles44%—
EnigmaEval16%—
Thematic Generalization80%—
EBR-Bench25.4%—
Mystery Game Puzzles37%—
DTBench94.4%—
LMCA52%—
Epoch Capabilities Index156.92—
ForecastBench59.5—

Math GPT-5.4 leads

GPT-5.4: 73.3 (#14), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 36.3 (#118)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.4Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct
LMArena Math14881440
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)78.6%—
FrontierMath Tier 449%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions83.1%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202597.8%—
ProofBench56%—
Omni-MATH—46.7%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)47.6%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)27.1%—

Knowledge GPT-5.4 leads

GPT-5.4: 65.3 (#13), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 41.3 (#102)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.4Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct
Vectara Hallucination Rate7%9.3%
LMArena Expert15071416
GPQA Diamond93.3%—
Humanity's Last Exam36.2%—
SimpleQA Verified45.1%—
MMLU-Pro—78.6%
GPQA (HELM)—63%

Multimodal Not comparable

GPT-5.4: 43.8 (#19), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.4Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct
LMArena Vision1302—
Blueprint-Bench 227.1%—
Furniture Assembly37.5%—
LMArena Document1471—

Multilingual GPT-5.4 leads

GPT-5.4: 56.4 (#22), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 52.3 (#88)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.4Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct
LMArena Non-English14651407
LMArena Chinese15201461
LMArena French14931415
LMArena German14721416
LMArena Japanese14841398
LMArena Korean14491366
LMArena Russian14801403
LMArena Spanish14531436

Instruction Following GPT-5.4 leads

GPT-5.4: 77.3 (#25), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 71.0 (#154)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.4Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following14691388
IFEval—81%

Long Context GPT-5.4 leads

GPT-5.4: 50.3 (#8), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 37.0 (#218)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.4Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct
LMArena Longer Query14741403
Fiction.LiveBench—55.6%
CL-bench27.9%—
CL-bench Life21.7%—

Writing & Preference GPT-5.4 leads

GPT-5.4: 72.1 (#18), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 58.2 (#116)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.4Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct
LMArena Text14691417
LMArena Creative Writing14391333
LMArena Multi-Turn14821415
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1840—
WildBench—80.7%
EQ-Bench 41272—

Frequently asked questions

Is GPT-5.4 better than Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct?

GPT-5.4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 59.5 to 42.5 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct costs 6.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.4's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.4 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-5.4 lists at $2.50 and $15.

Is GPT-5.4 or Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct better for coding?

GPT-5.4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 52.8 versus 41.9 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

GPT-5.4 does, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do GPT-5.4 and Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct share?

19 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.4 has 68 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct has 25.

Related comparisons

Go deeper