Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-6.1 Terra vs Qwen3.6 27B

GPT-6.1 Terra leads Qwen3.6 27B on coding, 77.4 to 36.8 on the Vibe Coding Index, and Qwen3.6 27B costs 1.9x less per output token ($2.70 vs $5.00 per million). Updated October 29, 2026; 8 benchmarks have a result for both.

GPT-6.1 TerraOpenAI
Coding
77.4
Overall
76.8
Output $/M
$5.00
8
Qwen3.6 27BQwen
Coding
36.8
Overall
50.2
Output $/M
$2.70
0
vs boards won of 8 shared

GPT-6.1 Terra or Qwen3.6 27B: which to pick

Pick GPT-6.1 Terra for coding: it scores 77.4 on the Vibe Coding Index against 36.8 for Qwen3.6 27B.

Pick Qwen3.6 27B for output tokens 1.9x cheaper ($2.70 vs $5.00 per million).

Shared results
8
GPT-6.1 Terra only
28
Qwen3.6 27B only
15
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.

At a glance

Coding index
GPT-6.1 Terra 77.4 from 4 benchmarks, Qwen3.6 27B 36.8 from 2 benchmarks.
Widest category
Coding, 42.2 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI): GPT-6.1 Terra 84.0% against Qwen3.6 27B 11.9%, 72.1 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-6.1 Terra $5.00 against Qwen3.6 27B $2.70 per million output tokens, 1.9x apart.
Context window
GPT-6.1 Terra takes 1.05M 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.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryGPT-6.1 TerraBarsQwen3.6 27BTies
Coding20
Reasoning30
Math20
General10
All shared boards80
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index20
Coding benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Terra and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 TerraQwen3.6 27BLeader
LiveBench coding94.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
LMArena WebDev1673Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
AA Coding IndexNot measured53.7Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured70.0%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)49.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)84.0%11.9%GPT-6.1 Terra
SciCode55.1%42.8%GPT-6.1 Terra
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured34.8%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
ALE-Bench2608.8Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
LMArena WebDev: React1657Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1719Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
Neither model has a result on the other 32 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Terra and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 TerraQwen3.6 27BLeader
AA Intelligence Index51.0Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured146.2Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index9 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Terra and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 TerraQwen3.6 27BLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured18.5Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
LiveBench research73.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
LiveBench browser93.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
LiveBench long agentic48.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)15.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)26.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI)1.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured94.2%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
APEX-Agents68.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
Neither model has a result on the other 33 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Terra and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 TerraQwen3.6 27BLeader
LiveBench reasoning88.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured84.2%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)46.2%23.1%GPT-6.1 Terra
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)94.3%85.9%GPT-6.1 Terra
Mystery game puzzles74.0%7.0%GPT-6.1 Terra
EBR-bench78.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Scale run)35.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Math benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Terra and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 TerraQwen3.6 27BLeader
OTIS Mock AIME100.0%91.1%GPT-6.1 Terra
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 390.9%35.1%GPT-6.1 Terra
FrontierMath, tier 492.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Terra and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 TerraQwen3.6 27BLeader
CaseLaw (Vals AI)Not measured53.2%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured62.3%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured71.3%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured68.3%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
SimpleQA Verified57.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Terra and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 TerraQwen3.6 27BLeader
Design Arena: websites1283Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
Design Arena: UI components1277Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
Design Arena: game dev1348Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
Design Arena: all code categories1295Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
LiveBench design82.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
General benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Terra and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 TerraQwen3.6 27BLeader
Vals Index60.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
LiveBench data analysis82.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
IFBenchNot measured67.6%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)82.7%77.3%GPT-6.1 Terra
DTBenchNot measured78.1%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
LMCANot measured34.5%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Furniture assembly79.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
MultiChallenge74.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
EQ-Bench 4Not measured1015Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Terra and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 TerraQwen3.6 27BLeader
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 Terra$0.0035Fits in one request
Qwen3.6 27B$0.0018Fits in one request

Qwen3.6 27B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-6.1 Terra$0.065Fits in one request
Qwen3.6 27B$0.031Fits in one request

Qwen3.6 27B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-6.1 Terra$0.250Fits in one request
Qwen3.6 27B$0.117Fits in one request

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.

Specifications of GPT-6.1 Terra and Qwen3.6 27B
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-6.1 TerraQwen3.6 27B
MakerOpenAIQwen
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedOctober 26, 2026April 27, 2026
Context window1.05M262K
Input $/Mtok$1.00$0.45
Output $/Mtok$5.00$2.70
Coding index77.436.8
Independent measurements behind it42
Cost per solved taskNot computable$1.30
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-6.1 Terra better than Qwen3.6 27B for coding?

Pick GPT-6.1 Terra for coding: it scores 77.4 on the Vibe Coding Index against 36.8 for Qwen3.6 27B. Pick Qwen3.6 27B for output tokens 1.9x cheaper ($2.70 vs $5.00 per million).

Which is cheaper, GPT-6.1 Terra or Qwen3.6 27B?

GPT-6.1 Terra costs $1.00 per million input tokens and $5.00 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-6.1 Terra or Qwen3.6 27B?

GPT-6.1 Terra, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-6.1 Terra vs Qwen3.6 27B comparison based on?

8 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 29, 2026. GPT-6.1 Terra's coding index rests on 4 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.

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-6-1-terra-vs-qwen3-6-27b" title="GPT-6.1 Terra vs Qwen3.6 27B, 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-6-1-terra-vs-qwen3-6-27b">LLMBenchmark.ai, GPT-6.1 Terra vs Qwen3.6 27B</a></p>