GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) vs Qwen3.5-Flash
Qwen3.5-Flash costs 2.3x less per output token than GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) ($0.26 vs $0.60 per million). Updated October 23, 2026; 34 benchmarks have a result for both.
GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) or Qwen3.5-Flash: which to pick
Only Qwen3.5-Flash has a coding score, 41.1 on the Vibe Coding Index; GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Compare them on price, context and the boards below.
- Shared results
- 34
- GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) only
- 12
- Qwen3.5-Flash only
- 21
- 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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Only Qwen3.5-Flash has a coding score, so no call is made.
One side not measured
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
No call
Only Qwen3.5-Flash has a GPQA Diamond result, 82.8%.
Directional only
Math
AIME
No call
Only Qwen3.5-Flash has a AIME result, 92.5%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
No call
Only Qwen3.5-Flash has a MMLU Pro result, 84.1%.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Qwen3.5-Flash
Qwen3.5-Flash takes 1M tokens against 128K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen3.5-Flash
GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) $0.0004, Qwen3.5-Flash $0.0002 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
No call
Only Qwen3.5-Flash has the number, $0.40.
Directional only
At a glance
- Coding index
- GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) not benchmarked, Qwen3.5-Flash 41.1 from 2 benchmarks.
- Widest category
- Math, 35.5 points apart on average over 4 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- OTIS Mock AIME: GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) 6.9% against Qwen3.5-Flash 84.4%, 77.5 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) $0.60 against Qwen3.5-Flash $0.26 per million output tokens, 2.3x apart.
- Context window
- GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) takes 128K tokens, Qwen3.5-Flash 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.
| Category | GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) | Bars | Qwen3.5-Flash | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 0 | 2 | ||
| Reasoning | 0 | 6 | ||
| Math | 0 | 4 | ||
| Knowledge | 0 | 5 | ||
| General | 0 | 17 | ||
| All shared boards | 0 | 34 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index02
| Benchmark | GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) | Qwen3.5-Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aider polyglot | 3.6% | Not measured | Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured |
| LMArena WebDev | Not measured | 1244 | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 83.3% | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | Not measured | 64.4% | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| WeirdML | 11.8% | Not measured | Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured |
| ALE-Bench | Not measured | 265.9 | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1289 | 1412 | Qwen3.5-Flash |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1291 | 1416 | Qwen3.5-Flash |
| LMArena WebDev: React | Not measured | 1229 | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | Not measured | 1291 | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 33 boards here | |||
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) | Qwen3.5-Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | Not measured | 143.5 | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) | Qwen3.5-Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| BALROG | 17.4% | Not measured | Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 41 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index06
| Benchmark | GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) | Qwen3.5-Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | Not measured | 82.8% | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| MMMU Pro (Vals AI) | Not measured | 81.9% | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 37.7% | 82.3% | Qwen3.5-Flash |
| SimpleBench | 10.7% | Not measured | Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured |
| Chess puzzles | 3.0% | 14.0% | Qwen3.5-Flash |
| Mystery game puzzles | 12.0% | 20.0% | Qwen3.5-Flash |
| VPCT | 34.0% | Not measured | Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1267 | 1403 | Qwen3.5-Flash |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1235 | 1407 | Qwen3.5-Flash |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1278 | 1409 | Qwen3.5-Flash |
| Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here | |||
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
| Benchmark | GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) | Qwen3.5-Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME | Not measured | 92.5% | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 6.9% | 84.4% | Qwen3.5-Flash |
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | 0.7% | 18.2% | Qwen3.5-Flash |
| MATH level 5 | 52.6% | Not measured | Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured |
| LMArena Text: math | 1267 | 1407 | Qwen3.5-Flash |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | 1271 | 1413 | Qwen3.5-Flash |
| Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here | |||
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index05
| Benchmark | GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) | Qwen3.5-Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | Not measured | 84.1% | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 84.3% | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| CaseLaw (Vals AI) | Not measured | 56.0% | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | Not measured | 63.6% | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | Not measured | 72.2% | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| MortgageTax (Vals AI) | Not measured | 67.4% | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| MedCode (Vals AI) | Not measured | 33.0% | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| SimpleQA Verified | 8.3% | 20.3% | Qwen3.5-Flash |
| MMLU | 76.7% | Not measured | Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured |
| GeoBench | 64.0% | Not measured | Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured |
| LMArena Text: science | 1286 | 1415 | Qwen3.5-Flash |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1282 | 1407 | Qwen3.5-Flash |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1305 | 1397 | Qwen3.5-Flash |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1265 | 1394 | Qwen3.5-Flash |
| Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here | |||
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) | Qwen3.5-Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 9 boards here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index017
| Benchmark | GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) | Qwen3.5-Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| SAGE (Vals AI) | Not measured | 42.5% | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | Not measured | 70.6% | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| DTBench | Not measured | 82.9% | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| LMCA | Not measured | 29.1% | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| Creative writing (Lech Mazur) | 67.2% | Not measured | Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured |
| LMArena Text | 1286 | 1397 | Qwen3.5-Flash |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1258 | 1375 | Qwen3.5-Flash |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1268 | 1343 | Qwen3.5-Flash |
| LMArena Vision | 1066 | Not measured | Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured |
| LMArena Text: English | 1301 | 1404 | Qwen3.5-Flash |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1266 | 1385 | Qwen3.5-Flash |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1265 | 1446 | Qwen3.5-Flash |
| LMArena Text: German | 1272 | 1391 | Qwen3.5-Flash |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | 1216 | 1369 | Qwen3.5-Flash |
| LMArena Text: Korean | 1195 | 1344 | Qwen3.5-Flash |
| LMArena Text: French | 1297 | 1413 | Qwen3.5-Flash |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | 1276 | 1399 | Qwen3.5-Flash |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1275 | 1380 | Qwen3.5-Flash |
| LMArena Text: Polish | 1244 | 1376 | Qwen3.5-Flash |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1285 | 1393 | Qwen3.5-Flash |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1289 | 1392 | Qwen3.5-Flash |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1282 | 1369 | Qwen3.5-Flash |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1253 | 1347 | Qwen3.5-Flash |
| LMArena Vision: English | 1072 | Not measured | Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured |
| LMArena Vision: Chinese | 1033 | Not measured | Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 23 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) | Qwen3.5-Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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
Qwen3.5-Flash costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Qwen3.5-Flash costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Qwen3.5-Flash 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.
| Specification | OpenAI GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | OpenAI | Qwen |
| Weights | No public weights listed | No public weights listed |
| Released | July 18, 2024 | February 25, 2026 |
| Context window | 128K | 1M |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.15 | $0.065 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.60 | $0.26 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | 41.1 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 2 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | $0.40 |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) better than Qwen3.5-Flash for coding?
Only Qwen3.5-Flash has a coding score, 41.1 on the Vibe Coding Index; GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Compare them on price, context and the boards below.
Which is cheaper, GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) or Qwen3.5-Flash?
GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) costs $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5-Flash costs $0.065 and $0.26. Cost per solved task is known for Qwen3.5-Flash only.
Which has the bigger context window, GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) or Qwen3.5-Flash?
Qwen3.5-Flash, with 1M tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks is the GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) vs Qwen3.5-Flash comparison based on?
34 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 23, 2026. GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)'s coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen3.5-Flash's on 2. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.