Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-4.1 Nano vs Qwen-Plus

GPT-4.1 Nano costs 1.9x less per output token than Qwen-Plus ($0.40 vs $0.78 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 28 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace GPT-4.1 Nano Replace Qwen-Plus
GPT-4.1 NanoOpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
24.7
Output $/M
$0.40
3
Qwen-PlusQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.78
25
vs boards won of 28 shared

GPT-4.1 Nano or Qwen-Plus: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick GPT-4.1 Nano for output tokens 1.9x cheaper ($0.40 vs $0.78 per million) and a larger context window (1.05M against 1M tokens).

Model AGPT-4.1 NanoOpenAINot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BQwen-PlusQwenNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved task
Shared results
28
GPT-4.1 Nano only
43
Qwen-Plus only
0
Like-for-like categories
5 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
GPT-4.1 Nano not benchmarked, Qwen-Plus not benchmarked.
Widest category
General, 9.9 points apart on average over 14 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
DTBench: GPT-4.1 Nano 52.5% against Qwen-Plus 81.1%, 28.5 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-4.1 Nano $0.40 against Qwen-Plus $0.78 per million output tokens, 1.9x apart.
Context window
GPT-4.1 Nano takes 1.05M tokens, Qwen-Plus 1M.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryGPT-4.1 NanoBarsQwen-PlusTies
Coding02
Reasoning13
Math22
Knowledge04
General014
All shared boards325
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index02
Coding benchmarks for GPT-4.1 Nano and Qwen-Plus
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 NanoQwen-PlusLeader
Aider polyglot8.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
AA Coding Index11.1Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)42.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)32.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)3.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
WeirdML19.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text: coding13061328Qwen-Plus
LMArena Text: software and IT13051343Qwen-Plus
Neither model has a result on the other 31 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-4.1 Nano and Qwen-Plus
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 NanoQwen-PlusLeader
AA Intelligence Index7.8Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Epoch Capabilities Index129.5Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-4.1 Nano and Qwen-Plus
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 NanoQwen-PlusLeader
τ²-Bench Telecom17.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)33.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index13
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-4.1 Nano and Qwen-Plus
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 NanoQwen-PlusLeader
GPQA Diamond50.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)55.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)51.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)3.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)48.9%48.1%GPT-4.1 Nano
ARC-AGI0.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
ARC-AGI-20.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Chess puzzles0.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts12861317Qwen-Plus
LMArena Text: expert12711328Qwen-Plus
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English12931333Qwen-Plus
Kagi LLM Benchmark33.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index22
Math benchmarks for GPT-4.1 Nano and Qwen-Plus
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 NanoQwen-PlusLeader
AIME26.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)80.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
MGSM (Vals AI)69.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
AA Math Index24.0Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)24.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
OTIS Mock AIME28.9%17.8%GPT-4.1 Nano
MATH level 570.0%65.3%GPT-4.1 Nano
LMArena Text: math12741326Qwen-Plus
LMArena Text: mathematical work12741332Qwen-Plus
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-4.1 Nano and Qwen-Plus
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 NanoQwen-PlusLeader
MMLU Pro63.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)61.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)42.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)60.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)52.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
MedQA (Vals AI)68.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)65.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
SimpleQA Verified6.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text: science12971352Qwen-Plus
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare12761350Qwen-Plus
LMArena Text: legal and government13001349Qwen-Plus
LMArena Text: business and finance12671303Qwen-Plus
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-4.1 Nano and Qwen-Plus
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 NanoQwen-PlusLeader
Design Arena: websites973Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Design Arena: UI components916Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Design Arena: game dev971Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Design Arena: data viz890Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Design Arena: 3D925Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Design Arena: all code categories963Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index014
General benchmarks for GPT-4.1 Nano and Qwen-Plus
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 NanoQwen-PlusLeader
IFBench32.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)20.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
DTBench52.5%81.1%Qwen-Plus
LMCA5.5%24.0%Qwen-Plus
Fiction.LiveBench25.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text12851326Qwen-Plus
LMArena Text: instruction following12661303Qwen-Plus
LMArena Text: creative writing12601292Qwen-Plus
LMArena Vision1063Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text: English13031339Qwen-Plus
LMArena Text: non-English12601310Qwen-Plus
LMArena Text: Chinese12701347Qwen-Plus
LMArena Text: German1288Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text: Japanese11981251Qwen-Plus
LMArena Text: Russian12611323Qwen-Plus
LMArena Text: multi-turn12771336Qwen-Plus
LMArena Text: longer queries12831324Qwen-Plus
LMArena Text: writing and language12611296Qwen-Plus
LMArena Text: entertainment and media12431270Qwen-Plus
LMArena Vision: English1101Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 26 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-4.1 Nano and Qwen-Plus
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 NanoQwen-PlusLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

GPT-4.1 Nano$0.0003Fits in one request
Qwen-Plus$0.0006Fits in one request

GPT-4.1 Nano costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-4.1 Nano$0.0062Fits in one request
Qwen-Plus$0.015Fits in one request

GPT-4.1 Nano costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-4.1 Nano$0.024Fits in one request
Qwen-Plus$0.060Fits in one request

GPT-4.1 Nano costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of GPT-4.1 Nano and Qwen-Plus
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-4.1 NanoQwen-Plus
MakerOpenAIQwen
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedApril 14, 2025February 1, 2025
Context window1.05M1M
Input $/Mtok$0.10$0.26
Output $/Mtok$0.40$0.78
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-4.1 Nano better than Qwen-Plus for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GPT-4.1 Nano for output tokens 1.9x cheaper ($0.40 vs $0.78 per million) and a larger context window (1.05M against 1M tokens).

Which is cheaper, GPT-4.1 Nano or Qwen-Plus?

GPT-4.1 Nano costs $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Qwen-Plus costs $0.26 and $0.78. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-4.1 Nano or Qwen-Plus?

GPT-4.1 Nano, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-4.1 Nano vs Qwen-Plus comparison based on?

28 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GPT-4.1 Nano's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen-Plus's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next