# GPT-4.1 nano vs Qwen3.6 Flash

> Qwen3.6 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 27.9 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4.1 nano costs 2.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.6 Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gpt-4-1-nano-vs-qwen3-6-flash
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 7

## Summary

- They share 7 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-4.1 nano scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.6 Flash in 3 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.6 Flash leads 29.0 to 8.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 28.9% for GPT-4.1 nano and 84.4% for Qwen3.6 Flash.
- GPT-4.1 nano is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $0.19 / $1.13 for Qwen3.6 Flash.
- GPT-4.1 nano accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.

## Snapshot

| | GPT-4.1 nano | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 27.9 | 38.8 |
| Rank | 327 | 182 |
| Context | 1.05M | 1M |
| Input $/M | $0.10 | $0.19 |
| Output $/M | $0.40 | $1.13 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

- GPT-4.1 nano: 24.1 (#330)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: —

| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 8.9% | — |
| SciCode | 25.9% | — |
| WeirdML | 19% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1306 | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 326.4 |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- GPT-4.1 nano: 26.5 (#104)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: —

| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 33% | — |

## Reasoning

- GPT-4.1 nano: 8.5 (#349)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: 29.0 (#96)

| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| DTBench | 52.5% | 77.1% |
| LMCA | 5.5% | 31% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 129.62 | 143.26 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 0% | — |
| SimpleBench | — | 35.2% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 33.3% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 0% | — |
| CritPt | 0% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 20% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1286 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 18% |

## Math

- GPT-4.1 nano: 26.9 (#252)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: 39.0 (#117)

| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 28.9% | 84.4% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 1% | 10.3% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 22.5% |
| Omni-MATH | 36.7% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1274 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 70% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 0% |

## Knowledge

- GPT-4.1 nano: 21.8 (#273)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: 42.1 (#100)

| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 48.9% | 83.3% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 6% | 15.9% |
| MMLU-Pro | 55% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 50.7% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1272 | — |

## Multimodal

- GPT-4.1 nano: 29.2 (#113)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: —

| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1063 | — |

## Multilingual

- GPT-4.1 nano: 41.6 (#205)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: —

| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1260 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1270 | — |
| LMArena German | 1288 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1198 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1261 | — |

## Instruction Following

- GPT-4.1 nano: 67.8 (#193)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: —

| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | 84.3% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1267 | — |

## Long Context

- GPT-4.1 nano: 23.7 (#296)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: —

| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 25% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1283 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- GPT-4.1 nano: 40.5 (#243)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: —

| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1285 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1260 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 946 | — |
| WildBench | 81.2% | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1277 | — |

## FAQ

### Is GPT-4.1 nano better than Qwen3.6 Flash?

Qwen3.6 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 27.9 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4.1 nano costs 2.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.6 Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, GPT-4.1 nano or Qwen3.6 Flash?

GPT-4.1 nano is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 Flash lists at $0.19 and $1.13.

### Which has the bigger context window?

GPT-4.1 nano does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.

### How many benchmarks do GPT-4.1 nano and Qwen3.6 Flash share?

7 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-4.1 nano has 38 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Flash has 13.