GPT-6.1 Terra vs Qwen3.7 Plus
GPT-6.1 Terra leads Qwen3.7 Plus on coding, 77.4 to 33.2 on the Vibe Coding Index, and Qwen3.7 Plus costs 3.9x less per output token ($1.28 vs $5.00 per million). Updated October 29, 2026; 14 benchmarks have a result for both.
GPT-6.1 Terra or Qwen3.7 Plus: which to pick
Pick GPT-6.1 Terra for coding: it scores 77.4 on the Vibe Coding Index against 33.2 for Qwen3.7 Plus.
Pick Qwen3.7 Plus for output tokens 3.9x cheaper ($1.28 vs $5.00 per million).
- Shared results
- 14
- GPT-6.1 Terra only
- 22
- Qwen3.7 Plus only
- 60
- 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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
GPT-6.1 Terra
GPT-6.1 Terra scores 77.4 against 33.2.
4 and 2 benchmarks behind the scores
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
No call
Only GPT-6.1 Terra has a AA Intelligence Index result, 51.0.
Directional only
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
No call
Only Qwen3.7 Plus has a AA Agentic Index result, 17.5.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
GPT-6.1 Terra
GPT-6.1 Terra leads, 1283 against 1268.
Same board, both measured
General
Vals Index
No call
Only GPT-6.1 Terra has a Vals Index result, 60.5%.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
GPT-6.1 Terra
GPT-6.1 Terra takes 1.05M tokens against 1M.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen3.7 Plus
GPT-6.1 Terra $0.0035, Qwen3.7 Plus $0.0010 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- GPT-6.1 Terra 77.4 from 4 benchmarks, Qwen3.7 Plus 33.2 from 2 benchmarks.
- Widest category
- Math, 31.6 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- Mystery game puzzles: GPT-6.1 Terra 74.0% against Qwen3.7 Plus 17.0%, 57.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- GPT-6.1 Terra $5.00 against Qwen3.7 Plus $1.28 per million output tokens, 3.9x apart.
- Context window
- GPT-6.1 Terra takes 1.05M 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.
| Category | GPT-6.1 Terra | Bars | Qwen3.7 Plus | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 2 | 0 | ||
| Agentic work | 2 | 0 | ||
| Reasoning | 3 | 0 | ||
| Math | 2 | 0 | ||
| Web design | 4 | 0 | ||
| General | 1 | 0 | ||
| All shared boards | 14 | 0 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index20
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Terra | Qwen3.7 Plus | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench coding | 94.3% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Terra measured |
| LMArena WebDev | 1673 | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Terra measured |
| AA Coding Index | Not measured | 55.9 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI) | 49.5% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Terra measured |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | 84.0% | 46.4% | GPT-6.1 Terra |
| Code migration (Vals AI) | Not measured | 12.9% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI) | Not measured | 52.8% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| SkillsBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 54.3% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| SciCode | 55.1% | 46.1% | GPT-6.1 Terra |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 47.0% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| FrontierCode | Not measured | 10.2% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| ALE-Bench | 2608.8 | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Terra measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | Not measured | 1473 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | Not measured | 1473 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena WebDev: React | 1657 | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Terra measured |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | 1719 | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Terra measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 27 boards here | |||
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Terra | Qwen3.7 Plus | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 51.0 | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Terra measured |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | Not measured | 147.0 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Terra | Qwen3.7 Plus | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | Not measured | 17.5 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LiveBench research | 73.9% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Terra measured |
| LiveBench browser | 93.1% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Terra measured |
| LiveBench long agentic | 48.6% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Terra measured |
| Finance Agent (Vals AI) | Not measured | 38.2% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI) | 15.2% | 10.5% | GPT-6.1 Terra |
| Legal Research Bench (Vals AI) | 26.0% | 16.4% | GPT-6.1 Terra |
| Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI) | 1.7% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Terra measured |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI) | Not measured | 49.3% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | Not measured | 93.0% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| APEX-Agents | 68.3% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Terra measured |
| OSWorld 2.0 | Not measured | 2.8% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 30 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Terra | Qwen3.7 Plus | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench reasoning | 88.7% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Terra measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 90.0% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 46.2% | 35.6% | GPT-6.1 Terra |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 94.3% | 87.9% | GPT-6.1 Terra |
| Mystery game puzzles | 74.0% | 17.0% | GPT-6.1 Terra |
| EBR-bench | 78.1% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Terra measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | Not measured | 1460 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: expert | Not measured | 1466 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | Not measured | 1460 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Vision: diagrams | Not measured | 1292 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Vision: homework | Not measured | 1295 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Scale run) | 35.7% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Terra measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here | |||
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Terra | Qwen3.7 Plus | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME | 100.0% | 93.3% | GPT-6.1 Terra |
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | 90.9% | 34.4% | GPT-6.1 Terra |
| FrontierMath, tier 4 | 92.7% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Terra measured |
| LMArena Text: math | Not measured | 1467 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | Not measured | 1470 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Terra | Qwen3.7 Plus | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MortgageTax (Vals AI) | Not measured | 66.2% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| SimpleQA Verified | 57.3% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Terra measured |
| LMArena Text: science | Not measured | 1464 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | Not measured | 1465 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | Not measured | 1452 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | Not measured | 1435 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here | |||
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Terra | Qwen3.7 Plus | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | 1283 | 1268 | GPT-6.1 Terra |
| Design Arena: UI components | 1277 | 1256 | GPT-6.1 Terra |
| Design Arena: game dev | 1348 | 1261 | GPT-6.1 Terra |
| Design Arena: data viz | Not measured | 1279 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Design Arena: 3D | Not measured | 1236 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Design Arena: all code categories | 1295 | 1267 | GPT-6.1 Terra |
| Design Arena: SVG | Not measured | 1205 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Design Arena: ASCII art | Not measured | 1139 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LiveBench design | 82.3% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Terra measured |
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Terra | Qwen3.7 Plus | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vals Index | 60.5% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Terra measured |
| LiveBench data analysis | 82.3% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Terra measured |
| SAGE (Vals AI) | Not measured | 89.2% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Vals Multimodal Index | Not measured | 53.9% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| IFBench | Not measured | 78.0% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 82.7% | 73.0% | GPT-6.1 Terra |
| DTBench | Not measured | 84.0% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMCA | Not measured | 37.6% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Furniture assembly | 79.2% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Terra measured |
| LMArena Text | Not measured | 1455 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | Not measured | 1440 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | Not measured | 1438 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Vision | Not measured | 1278 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: English | Not measured | 1459 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: non-English | Not measured | 1445 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | Not measured | 1510 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: German | Not measured | 1470 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | Not measured | 1412 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: Korean | Not measured | 1413 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: French | Not measured | 1471 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | Not measured | 1456 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | Not measured | 1458 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: Polish | Not measured | 1449 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | Not measured | 1459 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | Not measured | 1454 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | Not measured | 1437 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | Not measured | 1421 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Vision: English | Not measured | 1280 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Vision: Chinese | Not measured | 1332 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Vision: reading text | Not measured | 1288 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Vision: humor | Not measured | 1261 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Vision: creative writing | Not measured | 1258 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Document | Not measured | 1444 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| MultiChallenge | 74.2% | Not measured | Only GPT-6.1 Terra 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
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Terra | Qwen3.7 Plus | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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
Qwen3.7 Plus costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Qwen3.7 Plus costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Qwen3.7 Plus 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.
| Specification | OpenAI GPT-6.1 Terra | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | OpenAI | Qwen |
| Weights | No public weights listed | No public weights listed |
| Released | October 26, 2026 | June 3, 2026 |
| Context window | 1.05M | 1M |
| Input $/Mtok | $1.00 | $0.32 |
| Output $/Mtok | $5.00 | $1.28 |
| Coding index | 77.4 | 33.2 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 4 | 2 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is GPT-6.1 Terra better than Qwen3.7 Plus for coding?
Pick GPT-6.1 Terra for coding: it scores 77.4 on the Vibe Coding Index against 33.2 for Qwen3.7 Plus. Pick Qwen3.7 Plus for output tokens 3.9x cheaper ($1.28 vs $5.00 per million).
Which is cheaper, GPT-6.1 Terra or Qwen3.7 Plus?
GPT-6.1 Terra costs $1.00 per million input tokens and $5.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3.7 Plus costs $0.32 and $1.28. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, GPT-6.1 Terra or Qwen3.7 Plus?
GPT-6.1 Terra, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.
How many benchmarks is the GPT-6.1 Terra vs Qwen3.7 Plus comparison based on?
14 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 Qwen3.7 Plus's on 2. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.