GPT-4o vs Qwen3.6 27B
Qwen3.6 27B costs 3.7x less per output token than GPT-4o ($2.70 vs $10.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 8 benchmarks have a result for both.
GPT-4o or Qwen3.6 27B: which to pick
Only Qwen3.6 27B has a coding score, 36.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; GPT-4o has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Compare them on price, context and the boards below.
- Shared results
- 8
- GPT-4o only
- 19
- Qwen3.6 27B only
- 16
- 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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Only Qwen3.6 27B has a coding score, so no call is made.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
No call
Only Qwen3.6 27B has a AA Intelligence Index result, 21.4.
Directional only
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
No call
Only Qwen3.6 27B has a AA Agentic Index result, 18.5.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
No call
Only GPT-4o has a Design Arena: websites result, 831.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Qwen3.6 27B
Qwen3.6 27B takes 262K tokens against 128K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen3.6 27B
GPT-4o $0.0075, Qwen3.6 27B $0.0018 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
No call
Only Qwen3.6 27B has the number, $1.30.
Directional only
At a glance
- Coding index
- GPT-4o not benchmarked, Qwen3.6 27B 36.8 from 2 benchmarks.
- Widest category
- Agentic work, 69.0 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- τ²-Bench Telecom: GPT-4o 25.1% against Qwen3.6 27B 94.2%, 69.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- GPT-4o $10.00 against Qwen3.6 27B $2.70 per million output tokens, 3.7x apart.
- Context window
- GPT-4o 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.
| Category | GPT-4o | Bars | Qwen3.6 27B | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 0 | 1 | ||
| Agentic work | 0 | 1 | ||
| Reasoning | 0 | 2 | ||
| General | 0 | 4 | ||
| All shared boards | 0 | 8 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index01
| Benchmark | GPT-4o | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | 38.8% | Not measured | Only GPT-4o measured |
| SWE-bench Lite | 38.0% | Not measured | Only GPT-4o measured |
| SWE-bench (full test set) | 18.8% | Not measured | Only GPT-4o measured |
| SWE-bench Multimodal | 30.4% | Not measured | Only GPT-4o measured |
| AA Coding Index | Not measured | 53.7 | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | Not measured | 70.0% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 11.9% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 30.9% | Not measured | Only GPT-4o measured |
| SciCode | Not measured | 42.8% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 8.3% | 34.8% | Qwen3.6 27B |
| SciCode | 1.5% | Not measured | Only GPT-4o measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 28 boards here | |||
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-4o | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | Not measured | 21.4 | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | Not measured | 146.2 | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | GPT-4o | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | Not measured | 18.5 | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 25.1% | 94.2% | Qwen3.6 27B |
| GDPval | 9.9% | Not measured | Only GPT-4o measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
| Benchmark | GPT-4o | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 54.3% | 84.2% | Qwen3.6 27B |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 2.4% | 23.1% | Qwen3.6 27B |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | Not measured | 85.9% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| ARC-AGI | 4.5% | Not measured | Only GPT-4o measured |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 0.0% | Not measured | Only GPT-4o measured |
| Mystery game puzzles | Not measured | 7.0% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-4o | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Math Index | 6.0 | Not measured | Only GPT-4o measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | 6.0% | Not measured | Only GPT-4o measured |
| OTIS Mock AIME | Not measured | 91.1% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | Not measured | 35.1% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-4o | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| CaseLaw (Vals AI) | Not measured | 53.2% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | Not measured | 62.3% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | Not measured | 71.3% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| MortgageTax (Vals AI) | Not measured | 68.3% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 74.8% | Not measured | Only GPT-4o measured |
| MMLU | 88.1% | Not measured | Only GPT-4o measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-4o | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | 831 | Not measured | Only GPT-4o measured |
| Design Arena: UI components | 882 | Not measured | Only GPT-4o measured |
| Design Arena: game dev | 906 | Not measured | Only GPT-4o measured |
| Design Arena: data viz | 858 | Not measured | Only GPT-4o measured |
| Design Arena: 3D | 868 | Not measured | Only GPT-4o measured |
| Design Arena: all code categories | 860 | Not measured | Only GPT-4o measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
| Benchmark | GPT-4o | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| SAGE (Vals AI) | Not measured | 45.6% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| IFBench | 34.3% | 67.6% | Qwen3.6 27B |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 49.3% | 77.3% | Qwen3.6 27B |
| DTBench | 64.5% | 78.1% | Qwen3.6 27B |
| LMCA | 16.6% | 34.5% | Qwen3.6 27B |
| Neither model has a result on the other 41 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-4o | Qwen3.6 27B | 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
Qwen3.6 27B costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Qwen3.6 27B costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Qwen3.6 27B 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 | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | OpenAI | Qwen |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | May 13, 2024 | April 27, 2026 |
| Context window | 128K | 262K |
| Input $/Mtok | $2.50 | $0.45 |
| Output $/Mtok | $10.00 | $2.70 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | 36.8 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 2 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | $1.30 |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is GPT-4o better than Qwen3.6 27B for coding?
Only Qwen3.6 27B has a coding score, 36.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; GPT-4o has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Compare them on price, context and the boards below.
Which is cheaper, GPT-4o or Qwen3.6 27B?
GPT-4o costs $2.50 per million input tokens and $10.00 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 or Qwen3.6 27B?
Qwen3.6 27B, with 262K tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks is the GPT-4o vs Qwen3.6 27B comparison based on?
8 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GPT-4o'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.