Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-5 vs Qwen3.6 Flash

Qwen3.6 Flash costs 8.9x less per output token than GPT-5 ($1.125 vs $10.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 11 benchmarks have a result for both.

GPT-5OpenAI
Coding
38.8
Overall
51.5
Output $/M
$10.00
11
Qwen3.6 FlashQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.125
0
vs boards won of 11 shared

GPT-5 or Qwen3.6 Flash: which to pick

Only GPT-5 has a coding score, 38.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3.6 Flash has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Qwen3.6 Flash for output tokens 8.9x cheaper ($1.125 vs $10.00 per million) and a larger context window (1M against 400K tokens).

Shared results
11
GPT-5 only
102
Qwen3.6 Flash only
0
Like-for-like categories
6 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 38.8 from 3 benchmarks, Qwen3.6 Flash not benchmarked.
Widest category
Knowledge, 34.2 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
SimpleQA Verified: GPT-5 50.1% against Qwen3.6 Flash 15.9%, 34.2 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-5 $10.00 against Qwen3.6 Flash $1.125 per million output tokens, 8.9x apart.
Context window
GPT-5 takes 400K tokens, Qwen3.6 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.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryGPT-5BarsQwen3.6 FlashTies
Coding10
Intelligence10
Reasoning40
Math20
Knowledge10
General20
All shared boards110
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index10
Coding benchmarks for GPT-5 and Qwen3.6 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5Qwen3.6 FlashLeader
Aider polyglot88.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
SWE-bench Verified74.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena WebDev1418Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
AA Coding Index37.8Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)85.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)69.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)20.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)84.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)37.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Terminal-Bench49.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
GSO-Bench6.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
WeirdML60.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
ALE-Bench807.6326.4GPT-5
LMArena Text: coding1436Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1420Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1427Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
SciCode0.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 22 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-5 and Qwen3.6 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5Qwen3.6 FlashLeader
AA Intelligence Index23.0Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Epoch Capabilities Index150.0142.9GPT-5
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-5 and Qwen3.6 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5Qwen3.6 FlashLeader
τ²-Bench Telecom86.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
METR time horizons69.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Remote Labor Index1.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
GDPval34.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
BALROG32.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
DeepResearch Bench49.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
BrowseComp-Plus80.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-5 and Qwen3.6 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5Qwen3.6 FlashLeader
GPQA Diamond85.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)81.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)85.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)28.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)86.2%83.3%GPT-5
ARC-AGI65.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
ARC-AGI-29.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
SimpleBench56.7%35.2%GPT-5
Chess puzzles36.0%12.0%GPT-5
Mystery game puzzles23.0%18.0%GPT-5
EBR-bench12.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
VPCT66.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1415Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: expert1419Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1419Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Vision: diagrams1252Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Vision: homework1278Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark72.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Math benchmarks for GPT-5 and Qwen3.6 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5Qwen3.6 FlashLeader
AIME93.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)96.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)92.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
AA Math Index94.3Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)94.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
OTIS Mock AIME91.4%84.4%GPT-5
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 355.4%22.5%GPT-5
FrontierMath, tier 422.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
ProofBench18.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
MATH level 598.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: math1407Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1405Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-5 and Qwen3.6 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5Qwen3.6 FlashLeader
MMLU Pro86.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)86.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)66.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)61.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)73.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)65.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)96.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)49.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)87.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
SimpleQA Verified50.1%15.9%GPT-5
GeoBench81.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: science1416Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1413Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1431Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1400Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
FACTS Benchmark Suite56.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-5 and Qwen3.6 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5Qwen3.6 FlashLeader
Design Arena: websites1184Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Design Arena: UI components1180Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Design Arena: game dev1185Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Design Arena: data viz1221Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Design Arena: 3D1056Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1168Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Design Arena: SVG1189Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Design Arena: ASCII art1141Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
General benchmarks for GPT-5 and Qwen3.6 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5Qwen3.6 FlashLeader
SAGE (Vals AI)43.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)83.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
IFBench73.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)78.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
DTBench90.7%77.1%GPT-5
LMCA40.0%31.0%GPT-5
Fiction.LiveBench97.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)86.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text1406Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1388Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1365Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Vision1232Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: English1409Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: non-English1397Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1422Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: German1416Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1409Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: Korean1360Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: French1409Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1399Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: Russian1407Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: Polish1431Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1426Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1399Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1384Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1379Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Vision: English1231Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Vision: Chinese1267Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Vision: reading text1246Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Vision: humor1219Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Vision: captioning1212Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing things1263Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing1210Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-5 and Qwen3.6 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5Qwen3.6 FlashLeader
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$0.0063Fits in one request
Qwen3.6 Flash$0.0008Fits in one request

Qwen3.6 Flash costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-5$0.092Fits in one request
Qwen3.6 Flash$0.013Fits in one request

Qwen3.6 Flash costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-5$0.350Fits in one request
Qwen3.6 Flash$0.049Fits in one request

Qwen3.6 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.

Specifications of GPT-5 and Qwen3.6 Flash
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-5Qwen3.6 Flash
MakerOpenAIQwen
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedAugust 7, 2025April 27, 2026
Context window400K1M
Input $/Mtok$1.25$0.1875
Output $/Mtok$10.00$1.125
Coding index38.8Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it30
Cost per solved task$0.39Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-5 better than Qwen3.6 Flash for coding?

Only GPT-5 has a coding score, 38.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3.6 Flash has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Qwen3.6 Flash for output tokens 8.9x cheaper ($1.125 vs $10.00 per million) and a larger context window (1M against 400K tokens).

Which is cheaper, GPT-5 or Qwen3.6 Flash?

GPT-5 costs $1.25 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 Flash costs $0.1875 and $1.125. Cost per solved task is known for GPT-5 only.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5 or Qwen3.6 Flash?

Qwen3.6 Flash, with 1M tokens against 400K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-5 vs Qwen3.6 Flash comparison based on?

11 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GPT-5's coding index rests on 3 independent benchmarks and Qwen3.6 Flash's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next