Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-6.1 Sol vs Qwen3 Coder Flash

Updated October 21, 2026. 0 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

GPT-6.1 SolOpenAI
Coding
82.4
Overall
51.8
Output $/M
$10.00
Qwen3 Coder FlashQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.975
vs $10.00 vs $0.975 per 1M output tokens. Qwen3 Coder Flash is 10.3x cheaper.

Decision reading

Only GPT-6.1 Sol has a coding score, 82.4 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3 Coder Flash has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Qwen3 Coder Flash has the edge where output tokens cost 10.3x less.

Shared results
0
GPT-6.1 Sol only
95
Qwen3 Coder Flash only
0
Like-for-like categories
0 of 9

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.

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-6.1 Sol 82.4 from 5 benchmarks, Qwen3 Coder Flash not benchmarked.
Widest category
No category has a result for both models.
Widest single gap
No benchmark has a result for both models.
Output price
GPT-6.1 Sol $10.00 against Qwen3 Coder Flash $0.975 per million output tokens, 10.3x apart.
Context window
GPT-6.1 Sol takes 1.05M tokens, Qwen3 Coder 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.

CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index17 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Sol and Qwen3 Coder Flash
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 SolQwen3 Coder FlashLeader
LiveBench coding96.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena WebDev1753Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)55.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)88.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Code migration (Vals AI)65.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)3.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
IOI (Vals AI)96.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
SWE-bench Multimodal (Vals AI)43.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
CyberBench (Vals AI)39.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
SciCode55.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
FrontierCode50.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
ALE-Bench2743.8Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: coding1478Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1476Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena WebDev: React1754Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1800Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena WebDev: from an image1702Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Neither model has a result on the other 21 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Sol and Qwen3 Coder Flash
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 SolQwen3 Coder FlashLeader
AA Intelligence Index51.8Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Epoch Capabilities Index168.4Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index17 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Sol and Qwen3 Coder Flash
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 SolQwen3 Coder FlashLeader
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1200Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Design Arena: spreadsheets1244Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LiveBench research83.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LiveBench browser88.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LiveBench long agentic73.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
SREBench (Vals AI)50.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)52.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)21.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)38.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI)6.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)70.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
BioMysteryBench (Vals AI)79.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI)52.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Vals Science Index59.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Robo-bench (Vals AI)28.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
APEX-Agents60.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
SpireClimb24.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Neither model has a result on the other 22 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index14 boards, none shared
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Sol and Qwen3 Coder Flash
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 SolQwen3 Coder FlashLeader
LiveBench reasoning92.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
MysteryMechanism (Vals AI)46.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)52.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)95.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
ARC-AGI98.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
ARC-AGI-294.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Chess puzzles68.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Mystery game puzzles80.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
EBR-bench54.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1463Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: expert1489Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1465Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Vision: diagrams1306Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Vision: homework1356Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Sol and Qwen3 Coder Flash
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 SolQwen3 Coder FlashLeader
OTIS Mock AIME100.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 393.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
FrontierMath, tier 4100.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
ProofBench99.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: math1489Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1513Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Sol and Qwen3 Coder Flash
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 SolQwen3 Coder FlashLeader
MedCode (Vals AI)48.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
SimpleQA Verified73.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: science1444Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1433Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1471Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1445Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Sol and Qwen3 Coder Flash
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 SolQwen3 Coder FlashLeader
Design Arena: websites1320Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Design Arena: UI components1330Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Design Arena: game dev1389Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Design Arena: data viz1280Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Design Arena: 3D1463Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Design Arena: all code categories1345Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LiveBench design82.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index26 boards, none shared
General benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Sol and Qwen3 Coder Flash
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 SolQwen3 Coder FlashLeader
Vals Index63.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LiveBench data analysis82.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)59.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
SAGE (Vals AI)46.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)86.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)84.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
DTBench96.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMCA62.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Furniture assembly80.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text1443Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1466Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1425Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Vision1288Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: English1450Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: non-English1433Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1487Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: French1460Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1439Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: Russian1457Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1442Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1458Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1444Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1426Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Vision: English1274Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Vision: reading text1289Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing1301Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Neither model has a result on the other 20 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Sol and Qwen3 Coder Flash
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 SolQwen3 Coder 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-6.1 Sol$0.0070Fits in one request
Qwen3 Coder Flash$0.0007Fits in one request

Qwen3 Coder Flash costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-6.1 Sol$0.130Fits in one request
Qwen3 Coder Flash$0.013Fits in one request

Qwen3 Coder Flash costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-6.1 Sol$0.500Fits in one request
Qwen3 Coder Flash$0.049Fits in one request

Qwen3 Coder 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-6.1 Sol and Qwen3 Coder Flash
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-6.1 SolQwen3 Coder Flash
MakerOpenAIQwen
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedSeptember 29, 2026September 17, 2025
Context window1.05M1M
Input $/Mtok$2.00$0.195
Output $/Mtok$10.00$0.975
Coding index82.4Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it50
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-6.1 Sol better than Qwen3 Coder Flash for coding?

Only GPT-6.1 Sol has a coding score, 82.4 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3 Coder Flash has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Qwen3 Coder Flash has the edge where output tokens cost 10.3x less.

Which is cheaper, GPT-6.1 Sol or Qwen3 Coder Flash?

GPT-6.1 Sol costs $2.00 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3 Coder Flash costs $0.195 and $0.975. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-6.1 Sol or Qwen3 Coder Flash?

GPT-6.1 Sol, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-6.1 Sol vs Qwen3 Coder Flash comparison based on?

0 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GPT-6.1 Sol's coding index rests on 5 independent benchmarks and Qwen3 Coder Flash's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next