Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) vs Qwen3.6 27B

GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) costs 4.5x less per output token than Qwen3.6 27B ($0.60 vs $2.70 per million). Updated October 23, 2026; 4 benchmarks have a result for both.

GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)OpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.60
1
Qwen3.6 27BQwen
Coding
36.8
Overall
45.3
Output $/M
$2.70
3
vs boards won of 4 shared

GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) or Qwen3.6 27B: which to pick

Only Qwen3.6 27B has a coding score, 36.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) for output tokens 4.5x cheaper ($0.60 vs $2.70 per million) and work measured by Mystery game puzzles, where it leads.

Shared results
4
GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) only
42
Qwen3.6 27B only
21
Like-for-like categories
2 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-4o-mini (2024-07-18) not benchmarked, Qwen3.6 27B 36.8 from 2 benchmarks.
Widest category
Math, 59.3 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
OTIS Mock AIME: GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) 6.9% against Qwen3.6 27B 91.1%, 84.2 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) $0.60 against Qwen3.6 27B $2.70 per million output tokens, 4.5x apart.
Context window
GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) takes 128K tokens, Qwen3.6 27B 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-4o-mini (2024-07-18)BarsQwen3.6 27BTies
Reasoning11
Math02
All shared boards13
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index9 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkGPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)Qwen3.6 27BLeader
Aider polyglot3.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
AA Coding IndexNot measured53.7Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured70.0%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured11.9%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
SciCodeNot measured42.8%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured34.8%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
WeirdML11.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: coding1289Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1291Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkGPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)Qwen3.6 27BLeader
AA Intelligence IndexNot measured21.4Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured146.2Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkGPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)Qwen3.6 27BLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured18.5Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured94.2%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
BALROG17.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkGPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)Qwen3.6 27BLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured84.2%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured23.1%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)37.7%85.9%Qwen3.6 27B
SimpleBench10.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
Chess puzzles3.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
Mystery game puzzles12.0%7.0%GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)
VPCT34.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1267Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: expert1235Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1278Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Math benchmarks for GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkGPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)Qwen3.6 27BLeader
OTIS Mock AIME6.9%91.1%Qwen3.6 27B
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 30.7%35.1%Qwen3.6 27B
MATH level 552.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: math1267Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1271Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkGPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)Qwen3.6 27BLeader
CaseLaw (Vals AI)Not measured53.2%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured62.3%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured71.3%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured68.3%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
SimpleQA Verified8.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
MMLU76.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
GeoBench64.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: science1286Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1282Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1305Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1265Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkGPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)Qwen3.6 27BLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index27 boards, none shared
General benchmarks for GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkGPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)Qwen3.6 27BLeader
SAGE (Vals AI)Not measured45.6%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
IFBenchNot measured67.6%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured77.3%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
DTBenchNot measured78.1%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
LMCANot measured34.5%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)67.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text1286Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1258Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1268Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Vision1066Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: English1301Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: non-English1266Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1265Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: German1272Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1216Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: Korean1195Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: French1297Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1276Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: Russian1275Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: Polish1244Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1285Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1289Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1282Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1253Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Vision: English1072Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Vision: Chinese1033Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
EQ-Bench 4Not measured1026Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 21 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkGPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)Qwen3.6 27BLeader
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-4o-mini (2024-07-18)$0.0004Fits in one request
Qwen3.6 27B$0.0018Fits in one request

GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)$0.0093Fits in one request
Qwen3.6 27B$0.031Fits in one request

GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)$0.036Exceeds the context window
Qwen3.6 27B$0.117Fits in one request

GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) 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-4o-mini (2024-07-18) and Qwen3.6 27B
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)Qwen3.6 27B
MakerOpenAIQwen
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedJuly 18, 2024April 27, 2026
Context window128K262K
Input $/Mtok$0.15$0.45
Output $/Mtok$0.60$2.70
Coding indexNot benchmarked36.8
Independent measurements behind it02
Cost per solved taskNot computable$1.30
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) better than Qwen3.6 27B for coding?

Only Qwen3.6 27B has a coding score, 36.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) for output tokens 4.5x cheaper ($0.60 vs $2.70 per million) and work measured by Mystery game puzzles, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) or Qwen3.6 27B?

GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) costs $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 27B costs $0.45 and $2.70. Cost per solved task is known for Qwen3.6 27B only.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) or Qwen3.6 27B?

Qwen3.6 27B, with 262K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) vs Qwen3.6 27B comparison based on?

4 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 Qwen3.6 27B's on 2. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next