Model comparison

GPT-5.6 Sol vs Qwen3-4B

GPT-5.6 Sol is the stronger model overall, scoring 64.4 to 31.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified October 10, 2026. 4 shared benchmarks.

GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI

64.4

Rank #6 Confirmed

Qwen3-4B

Alibaba (Qwen)

31.5

Rank #261 Confirmed

Summary

They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5.6 Sol scores higher in 4 categories and Qwen3-4B in 0 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
The widest gap is in math, where GPT-5.6 Sol leads 85.5 to 28.5.
The biggest single-benchmark swing is Chess Puzzles: 64% for GPT-5.6 Sol and 4% for Qwen3-4B.
Qwen3-4B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GPT-5.6 Sol and Qwen3-4B specifications
	GPT-5.6 Sol	Qwen3-4B
Provider	OpenAI	Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index	64.4	31.5
Released	2026-07-09	2025-04-29
Weights	Proprietary	Open
Context window	1.05M	—
Max output	128K	—
Input $ / M tokens	$4	—
Output $ / M tokens	$20	—
Results tracked	64	6

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

GPT-5.6 Sol: 61.1 (#7), Qwen3-4B: —

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	GPT-5.6 Sol	Qwen3-4B
DeepSWE	72.7%	—
FrontierCode	47.5%	—
CursorBench	41.7%	—
LMArena WebDev	1619	—
FrontierSWE	32.2%	—
SciCode	57.1%	—
WeirdML	89.4%	—
LMArena Coding	1493	—
MirrorCode	20%	—
ALE-Bench	2,177	—

Agentic & Tool Use GPT-5.6 Sol leads

GPT-5.6 Sol: 50.2 (#7), Qwen3-4B: 27.3 (#94)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmark	GPT-5.6 Sol	Qwen3-4B
APEX-Agents	51.4%	—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard	—	35.7%
OSWorld 2.0	27.3%	—
τ²-bench Banking	46.9%	—
PostTrainBench	36.2%	—
BALROG	60%	—
GBAEval	52.6%	—
GDP.pdf	30.7%	—
LMArena Search	1257	—
Vending-Bench 2	9,619	—

Reasoning GPT-5.6 Sol leads

GPT-5.6 Sol: 74.7 (#6), Qwen3-4B: 18.5 (#264)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	GPT-5.6 Sol	Qwen3-4B
Chess Puzzles	64%	4%
ARC-AGI-2	92.5%	—
SimpleBench	71.7%	—
Kagi LLM Benchmark	67%	—
NYT Connections (extended)	93.8%	—
ARC-AGI-1	97.5%	—
CritPt	32.3%	—
EnigmaEval	37.1%	—
EBR-Bench	44.8%	—
LMArena Hard Prompts	1481	—
Mystery Game Puzzles	58%	—
DTBench	96%	—
LMCA	59.2%	—
Surface Evolver Bench	93.1%	—
Bench to the Future 3	0.14	—
Epoch Capabilities Index	161.99	—

Math GPT-5.6 Sol leads

GPT-5.6 Sol: 85.5 (#7), Qwen3-4B: 28.5 (#228)

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	GPT-5.6 Sol	Qwen3-4B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025	100%	52.2%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)	89.1%	—
FrontierMath Tier 4	82.9%	—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions	—	38.5%
ProofBench	83%	—
LMArena Math	1472	—
FrontierMath Erdős	0%	—

Knowledge GPT-5.6 Sol leads

GPT-5.6 Sol: 64.3 (#16), Qwen3-4B: 33.0 (#198)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	GPT-5.6 Sol	Qwen3-4B
GPQA Diamond	93.5%	52.3%
Vectara Hallucination Rate	12.4%	5.7%
SimpleQA Verified	69.7%	—
LMArena Expert	1517	—

Multimodal Not comparable

GPT-5.6 Sol: 48.9 (#8), Qwen3-4B: —

Multimodal benchmarks
Benchmark	GPT-5.6 Sol	Qwen3-4B
LMArena Vision	1281	—
Blueprint-Bench 2	33.6%	—
Furniture Assembly	56.7%	—
LMArena Document	1483	—

Multilingual Not comparable

GPT-5.6 Sol: 55.4 (#32), Qwen3-4B: —

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	GPT-5.6 Sol	Qwen3-4B
LMArena Non-English	1450	—
LMArena Chinese	1523	—
LMArena French	1475	—
LMArena German	1476	—
LMArena Japanese	1475	—
LMArena Korean	1434	—
LMArena Russian	1466	—
LMArena Spanish	1449	—

Instruction Following Not comparable

GPT-5.6 Sol: 77.8 (#16), Qwen3-4B: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	GPT-5.6 Sol	Qwen3-4B
LMArena Instruction Following	1480	—

Long Context Not comparable

GPT-5.6 Sol: 45.3 (#42), Qwen3-4B: —

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	GPT-5.6 Sol	Qwen3-4B
LMArena Longer Query	1479	—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

GPT-5.6 Sol: 73.5 (#12), Qwen3-4B: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	GPT-5.6 Sol	Qwen3-4B
LMArena Text	1456	—
LMArena Creative Writing	1450	—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing	1972	—
EQ-Bench 4	1250	—
LMArena Multi-Turn	1456	—

Frequently asked questions

Is GPT-5.6 Sol better than Qwen3-4B?