Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B

Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B leads gpt-oss-120b on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 39.9 to 11.6, and gpt-oss-120b costs 12.0x less per output token ($0.50 vs $6.00 per million). Updated October 23, 2026; 8 benchmarks have a result for both.

gpt-oss-120bOpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
50.0
Output $/M
$0.50
0
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95BQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$6.00
8
vs boards won of 8 shared

gpt-oss-120b or Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick gpt-oss-120b for output tokens 12.0x cheaper ($0.50 vs $6.00 per million) and work measured by AA Coding Index or SciCode, where it leads.

Shared results
8
gpt-oss-120b only
77
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B only
1
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, Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 46.4 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
AA Agentic Index: gpt-oss-120b 3.7 against Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B 50.1, 46.4 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
gpt-oss-120b $0.50 against Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B $6.00 per million output tokens, 12.0x apart.
Context window
gpt-oss-120b takes 131K tokens, Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B 1.05M.

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-120bBarsQwen3.8 2.4T A95BTies
Coding02
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
Reasoning02
Math01
General01
All shared boards08
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index02
Coding benchmarks for gpt-oss-120b and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Benchmarkgpt-oss-120bQwen3.8 2.4T A95BLeader
Aider polyglot41.8%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
SWE-bench Verified26.0%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
AA Coding Index30.471.9Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)83.2%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)33.6%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)87.8%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
SciCode34.0%54.1%Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
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-Bench575.6Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
LMArena Text: coding1379Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1387Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
SciCode7.7%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
Neither model has a result on the other 29 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for gpt-oss-120b and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Benchmarkgpt-oss-120bQwen3.8 2.4T A95BLeader
AA Intelligence Index11.639.9Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Epoch Capabilities Index139.8Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for gpt-oss-120b and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Benchmarkgpt-oss-120bQwen3.8 2.4T A95BLeader
AA Agentic Index3.750.1Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
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
MCP AtlasNot measured84.5%Only Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Reasoning benchmarks for gpt-oss-120b and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Benchmarkgpt-oss-120bQwen3.8 2.4T A95BLeader
GPQA Diamond78.5%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)78.2%93.5%Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)19.6%42.4%Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)75.8%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
SimpleBench22.1%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
Mystery game puzzles2.0%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1363Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
LMArena Text: expert1356Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1368Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark58.6%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Math benchmarks for gpt-oss-120b and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Benchmarkgpt-oss-120bQwen3.8 2.4T A95BLeader
AIME92.6%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
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%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
LMArena Text: math1389Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1387Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
MathArena15.1%31.6%Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index13 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for gpt-oss-120b and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Benchmarkgpt-oss-120bQwen3.8 2.4T A95BLeader
MMLU Pro79.2%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)75.9%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)48.8%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)58.2%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)71.6%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
MedQA (Vals AI)91.4%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)80.8%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
LMArena Text: science1382Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1388Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1354Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1359Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
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 7 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 Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Benchmarkgpt-oss-120bQwen3.8 2.4T A95BLeader
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 viz988Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
Design Arena: 3D902Not 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 index01
General benchmarks for gpt-oss-120b and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Benchmarkgpt-oss-120bQwen3.8 2.4T A95BLeader
IFBench69.0%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)52.0%80.3%Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
DTBench76.3%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
LMCA22.1%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
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 Text1366Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1318Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1274Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
LMArena Text: English1375Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
LMArena Text: non-English1350Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1385Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
LMArena Text: German1353Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1331Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
LMArena Text: Korean1283Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
LMArena Text: French1369Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1389Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
LMArena Text: Russian1343Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
LMArena Text: Polish1353Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1340Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1319Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1306Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1292Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
MultiChallenge45.3%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-120b measured
Neither model has a result on the other 23 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 Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Benchmarkgpt-oss-120bQwen3.8 2.4T A95BLeader
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
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B$0.0050Fits in one request

gpt-oss-120b costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

gpt-oss-120b$0.0065Fits in one request
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B$0.118Fits in one request

gpt-oss-120b costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

gpt-oss-120b$0.025Exceeds the context window
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B$0.460Fits in one request

gpt-oss-120b 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 Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
SpecificationOpenAI gpt-oss-120bQwen3.8 2.4T A95B
MakerOpenAIQwen
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedAugust 5, 2025August 12, 2026
Context window131K1.05M
Input $/Mtok$0.10$2.00
Output $/Mtok$0.50$6.00
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it10
Cost per solved task$0.51Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is gpt-oss-120b better than Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick gpt-oss-120b for output tokens 12.0x cheaper ($0.50 vs $6.00 per million) and work measured by AA Coding Index or SciCode, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, gpt-oss-120b or Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B?

gpt-oss-120b costs $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B costs $2.00 and $6.00. Cost per solved task is known for gpt-oss-120b only.

Which has the bigger context window, gpt-oss-120b or Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B?

Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B comparison based on?

8 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 23, 2026. gpt-oss-120b's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next