Compare AI models
| Specifications | ||
ParametersThe learned values that shape how a model responds. B means billion and T means trillion. For mixture-of-experts models, the total count is larger than the number active for each token. Parameter count alone does not measure quality. | — | 397B |
Context windowHow much information the model can work with in one request, measured in tokens — pieces of words or other data. This includes your question, attachments, conversation and reply. Limits can vary by model variant and provider. | 400k | 256k |
| API pricingUSD per 1M tokens · lower wins | ||
Input priceWhat you pay for everything you send the model — your question, plus any documents or earlier conversation you include with it. | — | $0.60 |
Output priceWhat you pay for the text the model writes back. It is normally the dearer half: producing an answer costs more than reading one. | — | $3.60 |
Cheapest inputLowest input rate across every provider on OpenRouter, the lab included. The cheapest endpoint may run a quantised build or a shorter context — see "Available from" on the model page. | — | $0.065Alibaba |
Cheapest outputLowest output rate across every provider on OpenRouter, the lab included. May come from a different provider than the cheapest input. | — | $0.13Darkbloom |
| — | $22.50Darkbloom · fp4 | |
| Benchmarks | ||
BullshitBench v2Nonsense detection — Given 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. | 32% | 78% |
SWE-Bench VerifiedCoding — Real 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% |
SWE-Bench MultilingualMultilingual coding — Like 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% |
Terminal-Bench 2.0Agentic terminal coding — Can 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% |
BrowseCompWeb browsing — Can the AI browse the web and track down hard-to-find answers? Higher is better. | — | 69% |
Humanity's Last Exam · no toolsMultidisciplinary reasoning — Humanity'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% |
GPQA DiamondScience — Graduate-level science questions in biology, physics, and chemistry — hard enough that subject-matter PhDs score around 65%. Higher is better. | — | 88.4% |
OSWorld-VerifiedAgentic computer use — Can the AI actually operate a computer — clicking, typing, and using real apps — to finish tasks on its own? Higher is better. | — | 62.2% |
CharXiv ReasoningChart reasoning — Can the AI read and reason about complex charts and figures, not just text? Higher is better. | — | 80.8% |
MMMU-ProMultimodal reasoning — A tougher version of MMMU — college-level questions that mix images, diagrams, and text together. Higher is better. | — | 79% |
MMMUMultimodal — Tests the AI on understanding images and text together across many college subjects. Higher is better. | — | 85% |
| Overview | ||
| Company | OpenAI | Qwen |
| Release date | Nov 13 2025 | Feb 16 2026 |
| Access | Closed | Open Weight |
| Model details | View model | View model |
Other comparisons
GPT-5.1-CodexvsClaude Fable 5.2Qwen3.5vsClaude Fable 5.2GPT-5.1-CodexvsGemini 4 CarbonQwen3.5vsGemini 4 CarbonGPT-5.1-CodexvsMuse EmberQwen3.5vsMuse EmberGPT-5.1-CodexvsGrok 4.7Qwen3.5vsGrok 4.7GPT-5.1-CodexvsDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017Qwen3.5vsDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017GPT-5.1-CodexvsMistral Large 4Qwen3.5vsMistral Large 4Frequently asked questions
Qwen3.5 leads GPT-5.1-Codex on 1 of the 1 benchmark they both report (BullshitBench v2). Only Qwen3.5 has a verified first-party price for an available API: $0.60 per million input tokens and $3.60 per million output tokens. No currently available pay-as-you-go API rate is tracked for GPT-5.1-Codex. GPT-5.1-Codex shipped 95 days before Qwen3.5, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Context windows are 400k (GPT-5.1-Codex) vs 256k (Qwen3.5). GPT-5.1-Codex is closed, while Qwen3.5 is open weight.
On BullshitBench v2, Qwen3.5 leads at 78% vs GPT-5.1-Codex at 32%.