Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-4 vs Qwen3.7 Plus

Qwen3.7 Plus leads GPT-4 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 25.2 to 6.7, and Qwen3.7 Plus costs 46.9x less per output token ($1.28 vs $60.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 35 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace GPT-4 Replace Qwen3.7 Plus
GPT-4OpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
6.7
Output $/M
$60.00
0
Qwen3.7 PlusQwen
Coding
33.2
Overall
25.2
Output $/M
$1.28
35
vs boards won of 35 shared

GPT-4 or Qwen3.7 Plus: which to pick

Only Qwen3.7 Plus has a coding score, 33.2 on the Vibe Coding Index; GPT-4 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

Model AGPT-4OpenAINot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BQwen3.7 PlusQwen33.2/1002 independent benchmarksNo cost per solved task
Shared results
35
GPT-4 only
10
Qwen3.7 Plus only
40
Like-for-like categories
6 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 not benchmarked, Qwen3.7 Plus 33.2 from 2 benchmarks.
Widest category
Reasoning, 48.3 points apart on average over 4 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run): GPT-4 34.9% against Qwen3.7 Plus 90.0%, 55.1 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-4 $60.00 against Qwen3.7 Plus $1.28 per million output tokens, 46.9x apart.
Context window
GPT-4 takes 8K tokens, Qwen3.7 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-4BarsQwen3.7 PlusTies
Coding03
Intelligence02
Reasoning04
Math02
Knowledge04
General020
All shared boards035
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index03
Coding benchmarks for GPT-4 and Qwen3.7 Plus
BenchmarkGPT-4Qwen3.7 PlusLeader
SWE-bench Verified22.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-4 measured
SWE-bench Lite39.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-4 measured
SWE-bench (full test set)12.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-4 measured
AA Coding Index13.155.9Qwen3.7 Plus
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured46.4%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
Code migration (Vals AI)Not measured12.9%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)Not measured52.8%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
SkillsBench (Vals AI)Not measured54.3%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
SciCodeNot measured46.1%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured47.0%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
FrontierCodeNot measured10.2%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
LMArena Text: coding12091473Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: software and IT11951473Qwen3.7 Plus
Neither model has a result on the other 25 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-4 and Qwen3.7 Plus
BenchmarkGPT-4Qwen3.7 PlusLeader
AA Intelligence Index6.725.2Qwen3.7 Plus
Epoch Capabilities Index125.7147.0Qwen3.7 Plus
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-4 and Qwen3.7 Plus
BenchmarkGPT-4Qwen3.7 PlusLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured17.5Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)Not measured38.2%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)Not measured10.5%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)Not measured16.4%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)Not measured49.3%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured93.0%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
OSWorld 2.0Not measured2.8%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
Neither model has a result on the other 32 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-4 and Qwen3.7 Plus
BenchmarkGPT-4Qwen3.7 PlusLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)34.9%90.0%Qwen3.7 Plus
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured35.6%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured87.9%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured17.0%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
BIG-Bench Hard75.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-4 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts12001460Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: expert11491466Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English12091460Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1292Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1295Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Math benchmarks for GPT-4 and Qwen3.7 Plus
BenchmarkGPT-4Qwen3.7 PlusLeader
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured93.3%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3Not measured34.4%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
GSM8K92.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4 measured
LMArena Text: math12301467Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: mathematical work12281470Qwen3.7 Plus
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-4 and Qwen3.7 Plus
BenchmarkGPT-4Qwen3.7 PlusLeader
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured66.2%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)56.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-4 measured
MMLU86.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-4 measured
AI2 Reasoning Challenge96.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-4 measured
LMArena Text: science11771464Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare11451464Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: legal and government11911451Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: business and finance11451435Qwen3.7 Plus
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-4 and Qwen3.7 Plus
BenchmarkGPT-4Qwen3.7 PlusLeader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1269Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured1261Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1262Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1276Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured1239Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1269Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1208Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
Design Arena: ASCII artNot measured1143Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index020
General benchmarks for GPT-4 and Qwen3.7 Plus
BenchmarkGPT-4Qwen3.7 PlusLeader
SAGE (Vals AI)Not measured39.3%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
Vals Multimodal IndexNot measured53.9%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
IFBench33.2%78.0%Qwen3.7 Plus
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured73.0%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
DTBench62.7%84.0%Qwen3.7 Plus
LMCA17.1%37.6%Qwen3.7 Plus
HellaSwag95.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-4 measured
WinoGrande87.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-4 measured
LMArena Text12061454Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: instruction following12011439Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: creative writing11911438Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena VisionNot measured1278Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
LMArena Text: English12201458Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: non-English11941445Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: Chinese11841509Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: German11981471Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: Japanese11371412Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: Korean10871413Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: French12201472Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: Spanish11971457Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: Russian11951457Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: Polish12651449Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: multi-turn12061459Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: longer queries11901454Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: writing and language12191437Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: entertainment and media11841422Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1280Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1332Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1288Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1261Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1258Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
LMArena DocumentNot measured1444Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-4 and Qwen3.7 Plus
BenchmarkGPT-4Qwen3.7 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$0.060Fits in one request
Qwen3.7 Plus$0.0010Fits in one request

Qwen3.7 Plus costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-4$1.68Exceeds the context window
Qwen3.7 Plus$0.020Fits in one request

Qwen3.7 Plus costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-4$6.60Exceeds the context window
Qwen3.7 Plus$0.077Fits in one request

Qwen3.7 Plus 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 and Qwen3.7 Plus
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-4Qwen3.7 Plus
MakerOpenAIQwen
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedMay 28, 2023June 3, 2026
Context window8K1M
Input $/Mtok$30.00$0.32
Output $/Mtok$60.00$1.28
Coding indexNot benchmarked33.2
Independent measurements behind it02
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-4 better than Qwen3.7 Plus for coding?

Only Qwen3.7 Plus has a coding score, 33.2 on the Vibe Coding Index; GPT-4 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

Which is cheaper, GPT-4 or Qwen3.7 Plus?

GPT-4 costs $30.00 per million input tokens and $60.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3.7 Plus costs $0.32 and $1.28. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-4 or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus, with 1M tokens against 8K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-4 vs Qwen3.7 Plus comparison based on?

35 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GPT-4's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen3.7 Plus's on 2. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next