Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-5.4 Nano vs Qwen3.7 Plus

GPT-5.4 Nano leads Qwen3.7 Plus on coding, 44.8 to 33.2 on the Vibe Coding Index, at about the same output price ($1.25 vs $1.28 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 63 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace GPT-5.4 Nano Replace Qwen3.7 Plus
GPT-5.4 NanoOpenAI
Coding
44.8
Overall
45.7
Output $/M
$1.25
5
Qwen3.7 PlusQwen
Coding
33.2
Overall
54.0
Output $/M
$1.28
57
vs boards won of 63 shared, 1 tied

GPT-5.4 Nano or Qwen3.7 Plus: which to pick

Pick GPT-5.4 Nano for coding: it scores 44.8 on the Vibe Coding Index against 33.2 for Qwen3.7 Plus.

Pick Qwen3.7 Plus for a larger context window (1M against 400K tokens) and work measured by Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) or Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI), where it leads.

Model AGPT-5.4 NanoOpenAI44.8/1002 independent benchmarks$0.14 per solved taskModel BQwen3.7 PlusQwen33.2/1002 independent benchmarksNo cost per solved task
Shared results
63
GPT-5.4 Nano only
22
Qwen3.7 Plus only
12
Like-for-like categories
7 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-5.4 Nano 44.8 from 2 benchmarks, Qwen3.7 Plus 33.2 from 2 benchmarks.
Widest category
Knowledge, 12.7 points apart on average over 5 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
LMArena Text: creative writing: GPT-5.4 Nano 1315 against Qwen3.7 Plus 1438, 20.6 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-5.4 Nano $1.25 against Qwen3.7 Plus $1.28 per million output tokens, 1.0x apart.
Context window
GPT-5.4 Nano takes 400K 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-5.4 NanoBarsQwen3.7 PlusTies
Coding35
Intelligence02
Agentic work051 tie
Reasoning09
Math13
Knowledge05
General128
All shared boards5571 tie
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index35
Coding benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Qwen3.7 Plus
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoQwen3.7 PlusLeader
AA Coding Index56.155.9GPT-5.4 Nano
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)84.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)69.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)26.1%46.4%Qwen3.7 Plus
Code migration (Vals AI)14.5%12.9%GPT-5.4 Nano
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)41.6%52.8%Qwen3.7 Plus
SkillsBench (Vals AI)Not measured54.3%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
SciCode47.2%46.1%GPT-5.4 Nano
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)42.4%47.0%Qwen3.7 Plus
FrontierCodeNot measured10.2%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
WeirdML49.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
ALE-Bench1004.5Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: coding14041473Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: software and IT14021473Qwen3.7 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-5.4 Nano and Qwen3.7 Plus
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoQwen3.7 PlusLeader
AA Intelligence Index20.725.2Qwen3.7 Plus
Epoch Capabilities Index146.0147.0Qwen3.7 Plus
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index05
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Qwen3.7 Plus
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoQwen3.7 PlusLeader
AA Agentic Index16.017.5Qwen3.7 Plus
Finance Agent (Vals AI)38.2%38.2%Tie
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)5.0%10.5%Qwen3.7 Plus
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)6.3%16.4%Qwen3.7 Plus
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)44.8%49.3%Qwen3.7 Plus
τ²-Bench Telecom76.0%93.0%Qwen3.7 Plus
OSWorld 2.0Not measured2.8%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index09
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Qwen3.7 Plus
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoQwen3.7 PlusLeader
GPQA Diamond77.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)73.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)81.7%90.0%Qwen3.7 Plus
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)28.3%35.6%Qwen3.7 Plus
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)78.5%87.9%Qwen3.7 Plus
ARC-AGI51.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
ARC-AGI-25.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Chess puzzles45.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Mystery game puzzles9.0%17.0%Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: hard prompts13811460Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: expert13961466Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13871460Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Vision: diagrams12101292Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Vision: homework12251295Qwen3.7 Plus
Kagi LLM Benchmark39.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index13
Math benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Qwen3.7 Plus
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoQwen3.7 PlusLeader
AIME88.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
OTIS Mock AIME87.8%93.3%Qwen3.7 Plus
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 344.9%34.4%GPT-5.4 Nano
FrontierMath, tier 412.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
ProofBench5.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: math14051467Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: mathematical work14091470Qwen3.7 Plus
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index05
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Qwen3.7 Plus
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoQwen3.7 PlusLeader
MMLU Pro77.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)77.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)51.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)61.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)67.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)59.1%66.2%Qwen3.7 Plus
MedCode (Vals AI)41.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
SimpleQA Verified11.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: science13741464Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13691464Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: legal and government13681451Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: business and finance13661435Qwen3.7 Plus
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Qwen3.7 Plus
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoQwen3.7 PlusLeader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1269Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured1258Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1261Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1276Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured1238Only 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 index128
General benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Qwen3.7 Plus
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoQwen3.7 PlusLeader
SAGE (Vals AI)38.1%39.3%Qwen3.7 Plus
MedScribe (Vals AI)77.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Vals Multimodal Index47.6%53.9%Qwen3.7 Plus
IFBench75.9%78.0%Qwen3.7 Plus
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)76.7%73.0%GPT-5.4 Nano
DTBench80.3%84.0%Qwen3.7 Plus
LMCA36.9%37.6%Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text13721454Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: instruction following13621439Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: creative writing13151438Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Vision11961278Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: English13811458Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: non-English13591445Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: Chinese13911509Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: German13681471Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: Japanese13431412Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: Korean13211413Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: French13951472Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: Spanish13711457Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: Russian13631457Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: Polish13661449Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: multi-turn13821459Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: longer queries13651454Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: writing and language13381437Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13251422Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Vision: English12021280Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Vision: Chinese12321332Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Vision: reading text12041288Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Vision: humor11611261Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Vision: recognizing things1141Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing11591258Qwen3.7 Plus
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-5.4 Nano and Qwen3.7 Plus
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoQwen3.7 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-5.4 Nano$0.0008Fits in one request
Qwen3.7 Plus$0.0010Fits in one request

GPT-5.4 Nano costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-5.4 Nano$0.014Fits in one request
Qwen3.7 Plus$0.020Fits in one request

GPT-5.4 Nano costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-5.4 Nano$0.052Fits in one request
Qwen3.7 Plus$0.077Fits in one request

GPT-5.4 Nano 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-5.4 Nano and Qwen3.7 Plus
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-5.4 NanoQwen3.7 Plus
MakerOpenAIQwen
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedMarch 17, 2026June 3, 2026
Context window400K1M
Input $/Mtok$0.20$0.32
Output $/Mtok$1.25$1.28
Coding index44.833.2
Independent measurements behind it22
Cost per solved task$0.14Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-5.4 Nano better than Qwen3.7 Plus for coding?

Pick GPT-5.4 Nano for coding: it scores 44.8 on the Vibe Coding Index against 33.2 for Qwen3.7 Plus. Pick Qwen3.7 Plus for a larger context window (1M against 400K tokens) and work measured by Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) or Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI), where it leads.

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.4 Nano or Qwen3.7 Plus?

GPT-5.4 Nano costs $0.20 per million input tokens and $1.25 per million output tokens; Qwen3.7 Plus costs $0.32 and $1.28. Cost per solved task is known for GPT-5.4 Nano only.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5.4 Nano or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus, with 1M tokens against 400K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-5.4 Nano vs Qwen3.7 Plus comparison based on?

63 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GPT-5.4 Nano's coding index rests on 2 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

Embed this comparison on your site

Free under CC BY 4.0, while the source link stays visible. Preview the frame · Terms and other embeds

<iframe src="https://llmbenchmark.ai/embed/compare/gpt-5-4-nano-vs-qwen3-7-plus" title="GPT-5.4 Nano vs Qwen3.7 Plus, LLMBenchmark.ai" width="100%" height="360" style="border:0;max-width:100%" loading="lazy"></iframe>
<p style="font:13px/1.4 sans-serif;margin:6px 0 0">Source: <a href="https://llmbenchmark.ai/compare/gpt-5-4-nano-vs-qwen3-7-plus">LLMBenchmark.ai, GPT-5.4 Nano vs Qwen3.7 Plus</a></p>