GPT-4o mini vs Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Wins 0 of 6 areas
—
Wins 6 of 6 areas
Coding · Agents · Reasoning · Facts · Images and charts · Following instructions
Qwen3.5 397B A17B is the stronger all-rounder.GPT-4o mini is cheaper.
Scores updated · 14 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the six areas where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- CodingWriting and fixing software03Qwen3.5 397B A17B3 of 3 tests
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own02Qwen3.5 397B A17B2 of 2 tests
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking02Qwen3.5 397B A17B2 of 2 tests
- Images and chartsUnderstanding pictures, charts and video02Qwen3.5 397B A17B2 of 2 tests
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up01Qwen3.5 397B A17B1 of 1 test
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked01Qwen3.5 397B A17B1 of 1 test
Facts and following instructions rest on a single test each.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
GPT-4o mini costs 82% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The tests each model wins by the widest margin, up to three each. Scores are out of 100.
Where Qwen3.5 397B A17B pulls ahead
- Fixes real GitHub issues in Python projectsSWE-bench Verified+67.7points ahead
- Follows unfamiliar, precisely checkable instructionsIFBench+47.8points ahead
- Graduate-level biology, physics and chemistry questionsGPQA Diamond+46.7points ahead
Where GPT-4o mini pulls ahead
No clear win on a test scored out of 100.
Every test, side by side
All 14 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingQwen3.5 397B A17B
- SWE-bench VerifiedQwen3.5 397B A17B by 67.78.776.4+67.7
- Terminal-Bench 2.1Qwen3.5 397B A17B by 45.75.651.3+45.7
- SciCodeQwen3.5 397B A17B by 21.922.944.8+21.9
AgentsQwen3.5 397B A17B
- GDPValQwen3.5 397B A17B by 14.8014.8+14.8
- τ-Bench V3 · BankingQwen3.5 397B A17B by 10.52.913.4+10.5
ReasoningQwen3.5 397B A17B
- GPQA DiamondQwen3.5 397B A17B by 46.742.689.3+46.7
- Humanity's Last ExamQwen3.5 397B A17B by 24.84.229+24.8
Images and chartsQwen3.5 397B A17B
Following instructionsQwen3.5 397B A17B
- IFBenchQwen3.5 397B A17B by 47.83178.8+47.8
Other results3 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexQwen3.5 397B A17B by 36.811.448.2+36.8
- MMLU-ProQwen3.5 397B A17B by 26.161.787.8+26.1
- AA IntelligenceQwen3.5 397B A17B by 11.76.718.4+11.7
Questions people ask
Which is better, GPT-4o mini or Qwen3.5 397B A17B?
Qwen3.5 397B A17B wins all six areas where both have results: coding, agents, reasoning, facts, images and charts and following instructions. GPT-4o mini wins none, but costs 82% less.
Which is better for coding?
Qwen3.5 397B A17B. It wins 3 of the 3 coding tests both models report; GPT-4o mini wins none.
Which is cheaper?
GPT-4o mini costs $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5 397B A17B costs $0.60 and $3.60. That makes GPT-4o mini about 82% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 14 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 11 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 3 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.