whichLlmmodel
Back to Dashboard

Alibaba Cloud (Qwen)Qwen3.6-PlusVSOpenAIGPT-5.4 nano

Analysis by:the whichllmmodel Editorial Team|Updated: June 2026

Our Take

We recommend Qwen3.6-Plus for its clear benchmark advantage, or the 2.4x cheaper GPT-5.4 nano only if your budget requires optimizing costs for very high-volume pipelines. While Qwen3.6-Plus offers superior reasoning and coding, it carries a moderate price premium. Choose Qwen3.6-Plus for quality, or GPT-5.4 nano for cost optimization.
WHY?
Benchmark Calculations & Evidence:
  • Coding Benchmarks: Both models were evaluated on the SWE-bench Pro benchmark. Qwen3.6-Plus scored 56.6%, while GPT-5.4 nano scored 52.4%.
  • Reasoning Benchmarks: Both models were evaluated on the GPQA Diamond benchmark. Qwen3.6-Plus scored 90.4%, while GPT-5.4 nano scored 82.8%.
  • Cost Efficiency: GPT-5.4 nano pricing ($0.2/M input, $1.25/M output) is 2.4x cheaper than Qwen3.6-Plus ($0.5/M input, $3/M output).
  • Was this recommendation helpful?
    Model Specs

    Qwen3.6-Plus

    Benchmarks & Scores

    Coding (swe-bench-pro)Winner (+4.2%)
    56.6%

    complex codebases, multi-file repositories, and architectural planning

    Reasoning (gpqa-diamond)Winner (+7.6%)
    90.4%

    graduate-level science QA

    Cost & Context

    Cost (per 1M tokens)
    $1.13Input: $0.50 | Output: $3.00
    Context WindowLarger
    1.05M tokens
    Model Specs

    GPT-5.4 nano

    Benchmarks & Scores

    Coding (swe-bench-pro)
    52.4%

    complex codebases, multi-file repositories, and architectural planning

    Reasoning (gpqa-diamond)
    82.8%

    graduate-level science QA

    Cost & Context

    Cost (per 1M tokens)2.4x cheaper
    $0.46Input: $0.20 | Output: $1.25
    Context Window
    400k tokens

    Frequently Asked Questions about Qwen3.6-Plus vs GPT-5.4 nano

    GPT-5.4 nano is cheaper than Qwen3.6-Plus. GPT-5.4 nano has a blended cost of $0.46/1M tokens, which is about 2.4x cheaper than Qwen3.6-Plus at $1.13/1M tokens.

    Qwen3.6-Plus is better for coding tasks on this benchmark. It scores 56.6% on swe-bench-pro (complex codebases, multi-file repositories, and architectural planning) compared to GPT-5.4 nano which scores 52.4%.

    Do you want to find a model for your constraints?

    Use our interactive model finder to filter LLMs by reasoning capability, coding performance, cost, and context length.

    Open Model Finder