Compare AI models
| Specifications | ||
ParametersA rough measure of how big the model is. More parameters usually means more capable and more expensive to run, though it is a poor guide on its own — a smaller, newer model often beats a larger, older one. | — | 80B |
Context windowHow much text the model can hold in mind at once — your question, any documents you attach, the conversation so far, and its own reply. Go past it and the earliest part falls out of view. | — | 256k |
| API pricingUSD per 1M tokens · lower wins · base tier | ||
Input priceWhat you pay for everything you send the model — your question, plus any documents or earlier conversation you include with it. | $1.75 | $0.30 |
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. | $14.00 | $1.50 |
Cached input priceA reduced rate for text you send over and over. If every request starts with the same instructions or the same document, the provider keeps a copy ready and charges less to read it again. | $0.175 | — |
Cheapest inputLowest input rate across third-party providers, excluding the lab itself. The cheapest endpoint may run a quantised build or a shorter context — see "Available from" on the model page. | $1.75Azure | $0.12Parasail |
Cheapest outputLowest output rate across third-party providers, excluding the lab itself. May come from a different provider than the cheapest input. | $14.00Azure | $0.80Parasail |
| Benchmarks | ||
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. | 85% | 70.6% |
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. | 24% | — |
SWE-Bench ProAgentic coding — Can the AI fix real bugs in real software? It's handed actual problems from open-source projects and has to write code that genuinely solves them. Higher is better. | — | 44.3% |
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. | — | 62.8% |
Next.js EvalsNext.js coding — Vercel's open eval of how well AI coding agents build and migrate real Next.js apps — measured as the share of tasks the agent completes successfully. Higher is better. | 68% | — |
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. | — | 36.2% |
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. | 64.7% | — |
threejsevalCommunity preference (Three.js) — Every model gets the same prompt — "the Eiffel Tower", "a glass fishbowl", "a robot arm picking toys into a box" — and builds a 3D scene in Three.js. Real people then see two scenes side by side, names hidden, and vote for the one they prefer. The votes become a chess-style Elo rating on threejseval.com, averaged across all the prompts. It measures whether the scene looks and moves right to a human eye, not whether the code passes a test. Higher is better. | 1163 | — |
| Overview | ||
| Company | OpenAI | Qwen |
| Release date | Feb 5 2026 | Feb 3 2026 |
| Access | Closed | Open Weight |
| Model details | View model | View model |
Other comparisons
GPT-5.3-CodexvsClaude Haiku 5.5Qwen3-Coder-NextvsClaude Haiku 5.5GPT-5.3-CodexvsGemini 4 ArgonQwen3-Coder-NextvsGemini 4 ArgonGPT-5.3-CodexvsMuse Spark 1.3Qwen3-Coder-NextvsMuse Spark 1.3GPT-5.3-CodexvsGrok 4.7Qwen3-Coder-NextvsGrok 4.7GPT-5.3-CodexvsDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashQwen3-Coder-NextvsDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashGPT-5.3-CodexvsMistral Large 4Qwen3-Coder-NextvsMistral Large 4Frequently asked questions
GPT-5.3-Codex leads Qwen3-Coder-Next on 1 of the 1 benchmark they both report (SWE-Bench Verified). Qwen3-Coder-Next is cheaper on both input and output: $0.30 vs $1.75 per million input tokens, and $1.50 vs $14.00 per million output tokens. Figures are base-tier rates. Qwen3-Coder-Next shipped 2 days before GPT-5.3-Codex, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
GPT-5.3-Codex is closed, while Qwen3-Coder-Next is open weight.
On SWE-Bench Verified, GPT-5.3-Codex leads at 85% vs Qwen3-Coder-Next at 70.6%.