Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-4.1 Nano vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B

Qwen3.5-122B-A10B leads GPT-4.1 Nano on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 17.7 to 7.8, and GPT-4.1 Nano costs 5.2x less per output token ($0.40 vs $2.08 per million). Updated October 23, 2026; 36 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace GPT-4.1 Nano Replace Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
GPT-4.1 NanoOpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
24.7
Output $/M
$0.40
0
Qwen3.5-122B-A10BQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$2.08
36
vs boards won of 36 shared

GPT-4.1 Nano or Qwen3.5-122B-A10B: 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 5.2x cheaper ($0.40 vs $2.08 per million) and a larger context window (1.05M against 262K tokens).

Model AGPT-4.1 NanoOpenAINot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BQwen3.5-122B-A10BQwenNot benchmarked1 independent benchmarkNo cost per solved task
Shared results
36
GPT-4.1 Nano only
35
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B only
15
Like-for-like categories
7 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, Qwen3.5-122B-A10B not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 76.3 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: GPT-4.1 Nano 17.3% against Qwen3.5-122B-A10B 93.6%, 76.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-4.1 Nano $0.40 against Qwen3.5-122B-A10B $2.08 per million output tokens, 5.2x apart.
Context window
GPT-4.1 Nano takes 1.05M tokens, Qwen3.5-122B-A10B 262K.

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 NanoBarsQwen3.5-122B-A10BTies
Coding04
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
Reasoning05
Math02
Knowledge04
General019
All shared boards036
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index04
Coding benchmarks for GPT-4.1 Nano and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 NanoQwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
Aider polyglot8.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena WebDevNot measured1361Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
AA Coding Index11.143.3Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
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
SciCodeNot measured39.7%Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)3.8%31.1%Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
WeirdML19.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text: coding13051436Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: software and IT13051436Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1352Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1352Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 31 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-4.1 Nano and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 NanoQwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
AA Intelligence Index7.817.7Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Epoch Capabilities Index129.5Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-4.1 Nano and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 NanoQwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
τ²-Bench Telecom17.3%93.6%Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)33.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 40 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index05
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-4.1 Nano and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 NanoQwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
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%85.7%Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)3.8%25.2%Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)48.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
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
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured17.0%Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts12861421Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: expert12721431Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English12921431Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1249Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1261Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark33.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Math benchmarks for GPT-4.1 Nano and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 NanoQwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
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%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
MATH level 570.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text: math12741431Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: mathematical work12741431Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-4.1 Nano and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 NanoQwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
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: science12971433Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare12761423Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: legal and government13001422Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: business and finance12661414Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Neither model has a result on the other 8 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 Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 NanoQwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
Design Arena: websites973Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Design Arena: UI components913Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Design Arena: game dev970Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Design Arena: data viz891Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Design Arena: 3D926Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Design Arena: all code categories962Not 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 index019
General benchmarks for GPT-4.1 Nano and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 NanoQwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
IFBench32.0%75.7%Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)20.3%76.3%Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
DTBench52.5%84.3%Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMCA5.5%32.2%Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Fiction.LiveBench25.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text12851418Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: instruction following12661400Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: creative writing12601368Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Vision10631244Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: English13031428Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: non-English12601401Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: Chinese12701463Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: German12881425Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: Japanese11981367Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1353Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1443Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1425Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Text: Russian12611400Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1399Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn12771417Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: longer queries12821411Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: writing and language12611387Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: entertainment and media12431366Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Vision: English11011249Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1301Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1251Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1243Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1220Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 20 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 Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 NanoQwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
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
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B$0.0013Fits 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
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B$0.019Fits 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
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B$0.073Fits 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 Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-4.1 NanoQwen3.5-122B-A10B
MakerOpenAIQwen
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedApril 14, 2025February 25, 2026
Context window1.05M262K
Input $/Mtok$0.10$0.26
Output $/Mtok$0.40$2.08
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it01
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-4.1 Nano better than Qwen3.5-122B-A10B 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 5.2x cheaper ($0.40 vs $2.08 per million) and a larger context window (1.05M against 262K tokens).

Which is cheaper, GPT-4.1 Nano or Qwen3.5-122B-A10B?

GPT-4.1 Nano costs $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5-122B-A10B costs $0.26 and $2.08. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-4.1 Nano or Qwen3.5-122B-A10B?

GPT-4.1 Nano, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-4.1 Nano vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B comparison based on?

36 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 23, 2026. GPT-4.1 Nano's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next