Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3.5-Flash

Qwen3.5-Flash costs 1.9x less per output token than gpt-oss-120b ($0.26 vs $0.50 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 44 benchmarks have a result for both.

gpt-oss-120bOpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
50.0
Output $/M
$0.50
3
Qwen3.5-FlashQwen
Coding
41.1
Overall
50.1
Output $/M
$0.26
41
vs boards won of 44 shared

gpt-oss-120b or Qwen3.5-Flash: which to pick

Only Qwen3.5-Flash has a coding score, 41.1 on the Vibe Coding Index; gpt-oss-120b has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick gpt-oss-120b for work measured by ALE-Bench or AIME, where it leads.

Shared results
44
gpt-oss-120b only
41
Qwen3.5-Flash only
11
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-oss-120b not benchmarked, Qwen3.5-Flash 41.1 from 2 benchmarks.
Widest category
Coding, 10.3 points apart on average over 5 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI): gpt-oss-120b 33.6% against Qwen3.5-Flash 64.4%, 30.8 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
gpt-oss-120b $0.50 against Qwen3.5-Flash $0.26 per million output tokens, 1.9x apart.
Context window
gpt-oss-120b takes 131K tokens, Qwen3.5-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-oss-120bBarsQwen3.5-FlashTies
Coding14
Intelligence01
Reasoning06
Math22
Knowledge09
General019
All shared boards341
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index14
Coding benchmarks for gpt-oss-120b and Qwen3.5-Flash
Benchmarkgpt-oss-120bQwen3.5-FlashLeader
Aider polyglot41.8%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
SWE-bench Verified26.0%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
LMArena WebDevNot measured1244Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured
AA Coding Index30.4Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)83.2%83.3%Qwen3.5-Flash
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)33.6%64.4%Qwen3.5-Flash
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)87.8%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
SciCode34.0%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)23.5%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
Terminal-Bench18.7%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
WeirdML48.2%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
ALE-Bench575.6265.9gpt-oss-120b
LMArena Text: coding13791412Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text: software and IT13871416Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1229Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1291Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured
SciCode7.7%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
Neither model has a result on the other 26 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for gpt-oss-120b and Qwen3.5-Flash
Benchmarkgpt-oss-120bQwen3.5-FlashLeader
AA Intelligence Index11.6Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
Epoch Capabilities Index139.8143.5Qwen3.5-Flash
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for gpt-oss-120b and Qwen3.5-Flash
Benchmarkgpt-oss-120bQwen3.5-FlashLeader
AA Agentic Index3.7Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
τ²-Bench Telecom65.8%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
APEX-Agents4.4%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
METR time horizons56.6%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
Vending-Bench 2-$22Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
BrowseComp-Plus67.0%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
Neither model has a result on the other 36 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index06
Reasoning benchmarks for gpt-oss-120b and Qwen3.5-Flash
Benchmarkgpt-oss-120bQwen3.5-FlashLeader
GPQA Diamond78.5%82.8%Qwen3.5-Flash
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)Not measured81.9%Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)78.2%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)19.6%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)75.8%82.3%Qwen3.5-Flash
SimpleBench22.1%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
Chess puzzlesNot measured14.0%Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured
Mystery game puzzles2.0%20.0%Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text: hard prompts13641403Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text: expert13561407Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13681409Qwen3.5-Flash
Kagi LLM Benchmark58.6%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index22
Math benchmarks for gpt-oss-120b and Qwen3.5-Flash
Benchmarkgpt-oss-120bQwen3.5-FlashLeader
AIME92.6%92.5%gpt-oss-120b
MATH 500 (Vals AI)94.8%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
MGSM (Vals AI)92.0%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
AA Math Index93.4Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)93.4%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
OTIS Mock AIME88.9%84.4%gpt-oss-120b
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3Not measured18.2%Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured
LMArena Text: math13891407Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text: mathematical work13861413Qwen3.5-Flash
MathArena15.1%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index09
Knowledge benchmarks for gpt-oss-120b and Qwen3.5-Flash
Benchmarkgpt-oss-120bQwen3.5-FlashLeader
MMLU Pro79.2%84.1%Qwen3.5-Flash
LegalBench (Vals AI)75.9%84.3%Qwen3.5-Flash
CaseLaw (Vals AI)48.8%56.0%Qwen3.5-Flash
CorpFin (Vals AI)58.2%63.6%Qwen3.5-Flash
TaxEval (Vals AI)71.6%72.2%Qwen3.5-Flash
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured67.4%Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured
MedQA (Vals AI)91.4%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
MedCode (Vals AI)Not measured33.0%Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)80.8%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
SimpleQA VerifiedNot measured20.3%Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured
LMArena Text: science13821415Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13881407Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text: legal and government13551398Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text: business and finance13591394Qwen3.5-Flash
PRBench Finance43.8%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
PRBench Legal40.2%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for gpt-oss-120b and Qwen3.5-Flash
Benchmarkgpt-oss-120bQwen3.5-FlashLeader
Design Arena: websites968Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
Design Arena: UI components924Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
Design Arena: game dev991Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
Design Arena: data viz987Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
Design Arena: 3D901Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
Design Arena: all code categories962Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index019
General benchmarks for gpt-oss-120b and Qwen3.5-Flash
Benchmarkgpt-oss-120bQwen3.5-FlashLeader
SAGE (Vals AI)Not measured42.5%Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured70.6%Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured
IFBench69.0%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)52.0%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
DTBench76.3%82.9%Qwen3.5-Flash
LMCA22.1%29.1%Qwen3.5-Flash
Fiction.LiveBench44.4%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)77.1%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
Surface Evolver Bench25.0%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
LMArena Text13661397Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text: instruction following13181374Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text: creative writing12741343Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text: English13751404Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text: non-English13511385Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text: Chinese13851445Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text: German13531390Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text: Japanese13311369Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text: Korean12821344Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text: French13701413Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text: Spanish13891400Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text: Russian13431380Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text: Polish13531376Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text: multi-turn13401393Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text: longer queries13191392Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text: writing and language13061369Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text: entertainment and media12921347Qwen3.5-Flash
MultiChallenge45.3%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
Neither model has a result on the other 21 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for gpt-oss-120b and Qwen3.5-Flash
Benchmarkgpt-oss-120bQwen3.5-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-oss-120b$0.0003Fits in one request
Qwen3.5-Flash$0.0002Fits in one request

Qwen3.5-Flash costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

gpt-oss-120b$0.0065Fits in one request
Qwen3.5-Flash$0.0040Fits in one request

Qwen3.5-Flash costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

gpt-oss-120b$0.025Exceeds the context window
Qwen3.5-Flash$0.016Fits in one request

Qwen3.5-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-oss-120b and Qwen3.5-Flash
SpecificationOpenAI gpt-oss-120bQwen3.5-Flash
MakerOpenAIQwen
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedAugust 5, 2025February 25, 2026
Context window131K1M
Input $/Mtok$0.10$0.065
Output $/Mtok$0.50$0.26
Coding indexNot benchmarked41.1
Independent measurements behind it12
Cost per solved task$0.51$0.40
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is gpt-oss-120b better than Qwen3.5-Flash for coding?

Only Qwen3.5-Flash has a coding score, 41.1 on the Vibe Coding Index; gpt-oss-120b has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick gpt-oss-120b for work measured by ALE-Bench or AIME, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, gpt-oss-120b or Qwen3.5-Flash?

gpt-oss-120b costs $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5-Flash costs $0.065 and $0.26. Per solved SWE-bench Verified task, gpt-oss-120b costs $0.51 and Qwen3.5-Flash $0.40.

Which has the bigger context window, gpt-oss-120b or Qwen3.5-Flash?

Qwen3.5-Flash, with 1M tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3.5-Flash comparison based on?

44 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. gpt-oss-120b's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Qwen3.5-Flash's on 2. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next