Qwen-Plus vs Fugu Ultra
Qwen-Plus costs 38.5x less per output token than Fugu Ultra ($0.78 vs $30.00 per million). Updated October 23, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $0.78
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $30.00
Qwen-Plus or Fugu Ultra: which to pick
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Qwen-Plus for output tokens 38.5x cheaper ($0.78 vs $30.00 per million).
No benchmark has tested both yet. Qwen-Plus has results on LMArena Text: coding, LMArena Text: software and IT and GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run); Fugu Ultra has none yet. Compare them on price and context instead.
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
No call
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Long documents
Listed context window
No call
Both take 1M tokens.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen-Plus
Qwen-Plus $0.0006, Fugu Ultra $0.020 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Qwen-Plus not benchmarked, Fugu Ultra not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- None yet: no category has been tested on both models.
- Widest single gap
- None yet: no benchmark has tested both models.
- Output price
- Qwen-Plus $0.78 against Fugu Ultra $30.00 per million output tokens, 38.5x apart.
- Context window
- Both take 1M tokens.
Benchmark by benchmark
Every board either model has a result on, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale. Only one model is measured on each, so no row names a leader.
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index2 boards measured
| Benchmark | Qwen-Plus | Fugu Ultra | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text: coding | 1328 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1343 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 41 boards here | |||
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards measured
| Benchmark | Qwen-Plus | Fugu Ultra | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 48.1% | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1316 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1328 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1333 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 19 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards measured
| Benchmark | Qwen-Plus | Fugu Ultra | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME | 17.8% | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| MATH level 5 | 65.3% | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: math | 1326 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | 1332 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards measured
| Benchmark | Qwen-Plus | Fugu Ultra | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text: science | 1352 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1350 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1349 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1303 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here | |||
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index14 boards measured
| Benchmark | Qwen-Plus | Fugu Ultra | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| DTBench | 81.1% | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMCA | 24.0% | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text | 1326 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1303 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1292 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: English | 1338 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1310 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1347 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | 1251 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1323 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1336 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1324 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1296 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1270 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 34 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
Qwen-Plus costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Qwen-Plus costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Qwen-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 | Qwen-Plus | Sakana Fugu Ultra |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Qwen | Sakana |
| Weights | No public weights listed | No public weights listed |
| Released | February 1, 2025 | June 24, 2026 |
| Context window | 1M | 1M |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.26 | $5.00 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.78 | $30.00 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Qwen-Plus better than Fugu Ultra for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Qwen-Plus for output tokens 38.5x cheaper ($0.78 vs $30.00 per million).
Which is cheaper, Qwen-Plus or Fugu Ultra?
Qwen-Plus costs $0.26 per million input tokens and $0.78 per million output tokens; Fugu Ultra costs $5.00 and $30.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Qwen-Plus or Fugu Ultra?
Neither: both take 1M tokens.
Has any benchmark tested both Qwen-Plus and Fugu Ultra?
No benchmark has tested both yet. Qwen-Plus has results on LMArena Text: coding, LMArena Text: software and IT and GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run); Fugu Ultra has none yet. Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 23, 2026.