GPT-4o minivsQwen3.5
GPT-4o mini | Qwen3.5 | |
|---|---|---|
| Specifications | ||
Parameters | — | 397B |
Context window | 128k | 1M |
| Benchmarks | ||
Nonsense detection BullshitBench v2Given a confidently-worded but nonsensical prompt, does the AI spot that it makes no sense and push back — instead of playing along and inventing an answer? The score is how often it clearly called out the nonsense. Higher is better. | 2% | — |
Coding SWE-Bench VerifiedReal coding tasks pulled from open-source projects — the AI has to find and fix actual bugs. A human-checked version of the original SWE-Bench. Higher is better. | — | 76.4% |
Multilingual coding SWE-Bench MultilingualLike SWE-Bench, but the coding problems span many programming languages, not just one. Tests how broadly the AI can code. Higher is better. | — | 69.3% |
Agentic terminal coding Terminal-Bench 2.0Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? (Version 2.0 of the test.) Higher is better. | — | 52.5% |
Web browsing BrowseCompCan the AI browse the web and track down hard-to-find answers? Higher is better. | — | 69% |
Multidisciplinary reasoning Humanity's Last Exam · no toolsHumanity's Last Exam — extremely hard expert questions across many subjects, written so you can't just look up the answer. “No tools” means the AI answers on its own. Higher is better. | — | 28.7% |
Science GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions in biology, physics, and chemistry — hard enough that subject-matter PhDs score around 65%. Higher is better. | 40.2% | 88.4%Best |
Agentic computer use OSWorld-VerifiedCan the AI actually operate a computer — clicking, typing, and using real apps — to finish tasks on its own? Higher is better. | — | 62.2% |
Chart reasoning CharXiv ReasoningCan the AI read and reason about complex charts and figures, not just text? Higher is better. | — | 80.8% |
Multimodal reasoning MMMU-ProA tougher version of MMMU — college-level questions that mix images, diagrams, and text together. Higher is better. | — | 79% |
Multimodal MMMUTests the AI on understanding images and text together across many college subjects. Higher is better. | — | 85% |
| Overview | ||
| Company | OpenAI | Qwen |
| Release date | Jul 18 2024 | Feb 16 2026 |
| Access | Proprietary | Open Weight |
Which is better: GPT-4o mini or Qwen3.5?
Qwen3.5 leads GPT-4o mini on 1 of the 1 benchmark they both report (GPQA Diamond). GPT-4o mini shipped 578 days before Qwen3.5, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Context windows are 128k (GPT-4o mini) vs 1M (Qwen3.5). GPT-4o mini is proprietary, while Qwen3.5 is open weight.
On GPQA Diamond, Qwen3.5 leads at 88.4% vs GPT-4o mini at 40.2%.
Frequently asked questions
GPT-4o mini was released by OpenAI on Jul 18 2024.
Qwen3.5 was released by Qwen on Feb 16 2026.
Qwen3.5 leads on GPQA Diamond — GPT-4o mini 40.2% vs Qwen3.5 88.4%.
GPT-4o mini has a 128k context window; Qwen3.5 has 1M.
GPT-4o mini is a proprietary model released by OpenAI. Qwen3.5 is an open weight model released by Qwen.
Other comparisons
GPT-4o minivsClaude Opus 5Qwen3.5vsClaude Opus 5GPT-4o minivsGemini 3.6 FlashQwen3.5vsGemini 3.6 FlashGPT-4o minivsMuse Spark 1.1Qwen3.5vsMuse Spark 1.1GPT-4o minivsGrok 4.5Qwen3.5vsGrok 4.5GPT-4o minivsDeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731Qwen3.5vsDeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731GPT-4o minivsMistral Medium 3.5Qwen3.5vsMistral Medium 3.5