Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-5.4 Nano vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B

Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B leads GPT-5.4 Nano on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 39.9 to 20.7, and GPT-5.4 Nano costs 4.8x less per output token ($1.25 vs $6.00 per million). Updated October 23, 2026; 7 benchmarks have a result for both.

GPT-5.4 NanoOpenAI
Coding
44.8
Overall
45.8
Output $/M
$1.25
0
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95BQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$6.00
7
vs boards won of 7 shared

GPT-5.4 Nano or Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B: which to pick

Only GPT-5.4 Nano has a coding score, 44.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B for a larger context window (1.05M against 400K tokens) and work measured by AA Coding Index or SciCode, where it leads.

Shared results
7
GPT-5.4 Nano only
78
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B only
2
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.

At a glance

Coding index
GPT-5.4 Nano 44.8 from 2 benchmarks, Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 34.1 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
AA Agentic Index: GPT-5.4 Nano 16.0 against Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B 50.1, 34.1 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-5.4 Nano $1.25 against Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B $6.00 per million output tokens, 4.8x apart.
Context window
GPT-5.4 Nano takes 400K tokens, Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B 1.05M.

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 NanoBarsQwen3.8 2.4T A95BTies
Coding02
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
Reasoning02
General01
All shared boards07
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index02
Coding benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoQwen3.8 2.4T A95BLeader
AA Coding Index56.171.9Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
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%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Code migration (Vals AI)14.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)41.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
SciCode47.2%54.1%Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)42.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
WeirdML49.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
ALE-Bench1004.5Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: coding1405Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1403Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 31 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoQwen3.8 2.4T A95BLeader
AA Intelligence Index20.739.9Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Epoch Capabilities Index146.0Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoQwen3.8 2.4T A95BLeader
AA Agentic Index16.050.1Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Finance Agent (Vals AI)38.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)5.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)6.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)44.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
τ²-Bench Telecom76.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
MCP AtlasNot measured84.5%Only Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoQwen3.8 2.4T A95BLeader
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%93.5%Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)28.3%42.4%Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)78.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
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%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1381Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: expert1396Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1387Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: diagrams1210Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: homework1225Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark39.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoQwen3.8 2.4T A95BLeader
AIME88.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
OTIS Mock AIME87.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 344.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
FrontierMath, tier 412.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
ProofBench5.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: math1406Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1409Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
MathArenaNot measured31.6%Only Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index12 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoQwen3.8 2.4T A95BLeader
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%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
MedCode (Vals AI)41.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
SimpleQA Verified11.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: science1374Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1369Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1368Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1366Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoQwen3.8 2.4T A95BLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
General benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoQwen3.8 2.4T A95BLeader
SAGE (Vals AI)38.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)77.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Vals Multimodal Index47.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
IFBench75.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)76.7%80.3%Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
DTBench80.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMCA36.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text1372Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1362Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1314Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Vision1196Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: English1381Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: non-English1360Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1391Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: German1368Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1343Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: Korean1320Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: French1395Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1371Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: Russian1362Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: Polish1366Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1382Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1366Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1338Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1324Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: English1202Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: Chinese1232Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: reading text1204Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: humor1161Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing things1141Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing1159Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 17 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 Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoQwen3.8 2.4T A95BLeader
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
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B$0.0050Fits 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
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B$0.118Fits 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
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B$0.460Fits 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 Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-5.4 NanoQwen3.8 2.4T A95B
MakerOpenAIQwen
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedMarch 17, 2026August 12, 2026
Context window400K1.05M
Input $/Mtok$0.20$2.00
Output $/Mtok$1.25$6.00
Coding index44.8Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it20
Cost per solved task$0.14Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-5.4 Nano better than Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B for coding?

Only GPT-5.4 Nano has a coding score, 44.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B for a larger context window (1.05M against 400K tokens) and work measured by AA Coding Index or SciCode, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.4 Nano or Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B?

GPT-5.4 Nano costs $0.20 per million input tokens and $1.25 per million output tokens; Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B costs $2.00 and $6.00. Cost per solved task is known for GPT-5.4 Nano only.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5.4 Nano or Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B?

Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B, with 1.05M tokens against 400K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-5.4 Nano vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B comparison based on?

7 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 23, 2026. GPT-5.4 Nano's coding index rests on 2 independent benchmarks and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next