# GPT-5.3 Chat vs Qwen3.7 Flash

> GPT-5.3 Chat is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.8 to 39.9 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.7 Flash costs 88× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.3 Chat's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gpt-5-3-chat-vs-qwen3-7-flash
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 0

## Summary

- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.7 Flash leads 48.9 to 38.8.
- Qwen3.7 Flash is cheaper at $0.03 / $0.13 per million input/output tokens, against $1.75 / $14 for GPT-5.3 Chat.
- Qwen3.7 Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.

## Snapshot

| | GPT-5.3 Chat | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 42.8 | 39.9 |
| Rank | 109 | 156 |
| Context | 128K | 1M |
| Input $/M | $1.75 | $0.03 |
| Output $/M | $14 | $0.13 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

- GPT-5.3 Chat: 41.4 (#124)
- Qwen3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | GPT-5.3 Chat | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1408 | — |

## Reasoning

- GPT-5.3 Chat: 28.5 (#102)
- Qwen3.7 Flash: 28.2 (#108)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.3 Chat | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 43.8% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 23% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1399 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 15% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 144.64 |

## Math

- GPT-5.3 Chat: 38.2 (#142)
- Qwen3.7 Flash: 38.3 (#140)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.3 Chat | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 19.3% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 86.7% |
| LMArena Math | 1389 | — |

## Knowledge

- GPT-5.3 Chat: 38.8 (#140)
- Qwen3.7 Flash: 48.9 (#75)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.3 Chat | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 82.3% |
| LMArena Expert | 1397 | — |

## Multilingual

- GPT-5.3 Chat: 50.3 (#124)
- Qwen3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | GPT-5.3 Chat | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1382 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1432 | — |
| LMArena French | 1397 | — |
| LMArena German | 1384 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1352 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1346 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1400 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1371 | — |

## Instruction Following

- GPT-5.3 Chat: 72.8 (#129)
- Qwen3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | GPT-5.3 Chat | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1378 | — |

## Long Context

- GPT-5.3 Chat: 42.6 (#120)
- Qwen3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | GPT-5.3 Chat | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1396 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- GPT-5.3 Chat: 63.1 (#68)
- Qwen3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | GPT-5.3 Chat | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1389 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1355 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1690 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1412 | — |

## FAQ

### Is GPT-5.3 Chat better than Qwen3.7 Flash?

GPT-5.3 Chat is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.8 to 39.9 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.7 Flash costs 88× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.3 Chat's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, GPT-5.3 Chat or Qwen3.7 Flash?

Qwen3.7 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.03 per million input tokens and $0.13 per million output tokens; GPT-5.3 Chat lists at $1.75 and $14.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.7 Flash does, with 1M tokens against 128K.

### How many benchmarks do GPT-5.3 Chat and Qwen3.7 Flash share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.3 Chat has 18 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Flash has 7.