Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-4.1 vs Qwen2.5 7B Instruct

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct costs 40.0x less per output token than GPT-4.1 ($0.20 vs $8.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 5 benchmarks have a result for both.

GPT-4.1OpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
36.5
Output $/M
$8.00
5
Qwen2.5 7B InstructQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.20
0
vs boards won of 5 shared

GPT-4.1 or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: which to pick

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

Pick GPT-4.1 for a larger context window (1.05M against 33K tokens).

Shared results
5
GPT-4.1 only
87
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct only
2
Like-for-like categories
4 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 not benchmarked, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct not benchmarked.
Widest category
Math, 35.8 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
OTIS Mock AIME: GPT-4.1 38.3% against Qwen2.5 7B Instruct 2.5%, 35.8 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-4.1 $8.00 against Qwen2.5 7B Instruct $0.20 per million output tokens, 40.0x apart.
Context window
GPT-4.1 takes 1.05M tokens, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct 33K.

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-4.1BarsQwen2.5 7B InstructTies
Intelligence10
Reasoning10
Math10
General20
All shared boards50
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index11 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for GPT-4.1 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
BenchmarkGPT-4.1Qwen2.5 7B InstructLeader
Aider polyglot52.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
SWE-bench Verified39.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
SWE-bench Multimodal31.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)54.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)45.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)13.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
WeirdML39.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
ALE-Bench558.1Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: coding1390Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1391Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
SciCode4.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 28 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-4.1 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
BenchmarkGPT-4.1Qwen2.5 7B InstructLeader
AA Intelligence Index12.7Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Epoch Capabilities Index136.7118.5GPT-4.1
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-4.1 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
BenchmarkGPT-4.1Qwen2.5 7B InstructLeader
τ²-Bench Telecom47.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
BALROGNot measured7.8%Only Qwen2.5 7B Instruct measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)54.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
BrowseComp-Plus36.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-4.1 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
BenchmarkGPT-4.1Qwen2.5 7B InstructLeader
GPQA Diamond65.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)72.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)66.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)4.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)66.9%35.5%GPT-4.1
ARC-AGI5.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
ARC-AGI-20.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
SimpleBench27.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Chess puzzles3.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1384Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: expert1364Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1393Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Vision: diagrams1215Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Vision: homework1248Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark52.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Math benchmarks for GPT-4.1 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
BenchmarkGPT-4.1Qwen2.5 7B InstructLeader
AIME39.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)87.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)87.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
AA Math Index34.7Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)34.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
OTIS Mock AIME38.3%2.5%GPT-4.1
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 36.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
MATH level 583.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: math1369Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1360Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index16 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-4.1 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
BenchmarkGPT-4.1Qwen2.5 7B InstructLeader
MMLU Pro80.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)83.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)69.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)63.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)75.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)65.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)91.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)80.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
SimpleQA Verified31.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
MMLUNot measured72.9%Only Qwen2.5 7B Instruct measured
GeoBench72.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: science1382Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1379Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1399Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1369Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
FACTS Benchmark Suite45.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-4.1 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
BenchmarkGPT-4.1Qwen2.5 7B InstructLeader
Design Arena: websites1039Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Design Arena: UI components1000Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Design Arena: game dev1080Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Design Arena: data viz1104Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Design Arena: 3D850Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1026Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
General benchmarks for GPT-4.1 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
BenchmarkGPT-4.1Qwen2.5 7B InstructLeader
IFBench43.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)68.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
DTBench68.3%47.7%GPT-4.1
LMCA25.6%6.4%GPT-4.1
Fiction.LiveBench63.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text1383Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1367Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1363Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Vision1210Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: English1392Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: non-English1370Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1382Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: German1381Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1319Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: Korean1338Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: French1382Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1376Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: Russian1377Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: Polish1389Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1397Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1385Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1371Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1365Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Vision: English1209Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Vision: Chinese1226Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Vision: reading text1218Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Vision: humor1196Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Vision: captioning1207Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing things1208Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing1210Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-4.1 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
BenchmarkGPT-4.1Qwen2.5 7B InstructLeader
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$0.0060Fits in one request
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct$0.0002Fits in one request

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-4.1$0.124Fits in one request
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct$0.0056Exceeds the context window

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-4.1$0.480Fits in one request
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct$0.022Exceeds the context window

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct 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 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-4.1Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
MakerOpenAIQwen
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedApril 14, 2025October 16, 2024
Context window1.05M33K
Input $/Mtok$2.00$0.10
Output $/Mtok$8.00$0.20
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved task$0.37Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-4.1 better than Qwen2.5 7B Instruct for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GPT-4.1 for a larger context window (1.05M against 33K tokens).

Which is cheaper, GPT-4.1 or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?

GPT-4.1 costs $2.00 per million input tokens and $8.00 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5 7B Instruct costs $0.10 and $0.20. Cost per solved task is known for GPT-4.1 only.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-4.1 or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?

GPT-4.1, with 1.05M tokens against 33K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-4.1 vs Qwen2.5 7B Instruct comparison based on?

5 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GPT-4.1's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next