Skip to main content

Model comparison

GPT-5.4 vs Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 15 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

OpenAI
74.24/100
Margin
14.5pts
← winning
59.72/100
3 category wins1 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: GPT-5.4 #8 (Supported); Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) #53 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. GPT-5.4 and Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) share 15 comparable benchmark results. 4 of 8 categories are comparable. 37 results are unique to GPT-5.4; 6 to Qwen 3.6 Max (preview).

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
15
GPT-5.4 only
37
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) only
6
Comparable categories
4 / 8

Pick GPT-5.4 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 15 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 4 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

GPT-5.4 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 74.24 to 59.72. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

GPT-5.4's sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 42.5 against 18.4. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), 47.600% to 23.103%. Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) does hit back in knowledge, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.

GPT-5.4 gives you the larger context window at 1.05M, compared with 256K for Qwen 3.6 Max (preview).

Category breakdown

Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.

Category scores and score margins for GPT-5.4 and Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)
CategoryGPT-5.4ΔQwen 3.6 Max (preview)
MathGPT-5.442.5Margin 24.1Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)18.4
KnowledgeGPT-5.457.6Margin 16.3Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)73.9
AgenticGPT-5.477.2Margin 11.8Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)65.4
CodingGPT-5.457.7Margin 6.7Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)51.0
MultimodalGPT-5.473.2MarginNo overlapQwen 3.6 Max (preview)Not measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · GPT-5.4B · Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)
  1. FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)

    Math
    Source ↗
    A 47.600%B 23.103%
    Winner: GPT-5.4Δ 24.5
    FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): GPT-5.4 scored 47.600%; Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) scored 23.103%. GPT-5.4 wins this benchmark.
  2. FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)

    Math
    Source ↗
    A 27.100%B 4.167%
    Winner: GPT-5.4Δ 22.9
    FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4): GPT-5.4 scored 27.100%; Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) scored 4.167%. GPT-5.4 wins this benchmark.
  3. Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 75.1%B 65.4%
    Winner: GPT-5.4Δ 9.7
    Terminal-Bench 2.0: GPT-5.4 scored 75.1%; Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) scored 65.4%. GPT-5.4 wins this benchmark.
  4. SWE-bench Pro

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 57.7%B 57.3%
    Winner: GPT-5.4Δ 0.4
    SWE-bench Pro: GPT-5.4 scored 57.7%; Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) scored 57.3%. GPT-5.4 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricGPT-5.4Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGPT-5.4$2.5 input / $15 outputQwen 3.6 Max (preview)Not availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondGPT-5.474 tok/sQwen 3.6 Max (preview)Not availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGPT-5.4151.79 sQwen 3.6 Max (preview)Not availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGPT-5.41.05MQwen 3.6 Max (preview)256KGPT-5.4 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticGPT-5.4 wins
BenchmarkGPT-5.4Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Result
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 75.1%65.4%GPT-5.4 leads
CyberGymSource 79.0%Not comparable
BrowseCompSource 82.7%Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 75%Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource 70.6%Not comparable
ToolathlonSource 54.6%Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 87.1%95.9%Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) leads
Claw-EvalSource 60.3%Not comparable
DeepSearchQASource 73.6%Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 41.1%Not comparable
APEX-Agents-AASource 33.3%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 44.7%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 1395Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 64.89%Not comparable
ResearchClawBenchSource 15.3%Not comparable
JobBenchSource 38.9%Not comparable
ExploitGymSource 6.0%Not comparable
QwenClawBenchSource 59.0%Not comparable
QwenWebBenchSource 1532Not comparable
CodingGPT-5.4 wins
BenchmarkGPT-5.4Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Result
LiveCodeBench ProSource 87.5%Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 57.7%57.3%GPT-5.4 leads
React Native EvalsSource 85.3%Not comparable
Vibe Code BenchSource 67.42%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 71.0%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 56.6%46.9%GPT-5.4 leads
SciCodeSource 47%Not comparable
NL2RepoSource 42.9%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 65.4%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkGPT-5.4Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Result
AA-LCRSource 74.0%69.7%GPT-5.4 leads
CritPtSource 23.4%3.7%GPT-5.4 leads
KnowledgeQwen 3.6 Max (preview) wins
BenchmarkGPT-5.4Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Result
GPQASource 92.8%Not comparable
HLESource 52.1%Not comparable
HLE w/o toolsSource 39.8%Not comparable
GPQA-DSource 92.8%Not comparable
HealthBench HardSource 40.1%Not comparable
MedXpertQA (Text)Source 59.6%Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 51.4%40.0%GPT-5.4 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 92.0%88.8%GPT-5.4 leads
AA-HLESource 41.6%28.9%GPT-5.4 leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource 5.7%10.2%Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 50.0%37.7%GPT-5.4 leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 88.6%44.2%Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) leads
HealthBench ProfessionalSource 48.1%Not comparable
SuperGPQASource 73.9%Not comparable
MathGPT-5.4 wins
BenchmarkGPT-5.4Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Result
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 47.600%23.103%GPT-5.4 leads
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 27.100%4.167%GPT-5.4 leads
Multimodal
BenchmarkGPT-5.4Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Result
MMMU-ProSource 81.2%Not comparable
OfficeQA ProSource 53.2%Not comparable
MMMU-Pro w/ PythonSource 82.1%Not comparable
CharXivSource 82.8%Not comparable
ERQASource 65.4%Not comparable
SimpleVQASource 61.1%Not comparable
ScreenSpot ProSource 85.4%Not comparable
ZeroBenchSource 41.0%Not comparable
MedXpertQA (MM)Source 77.1%Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource 78.4%Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1250Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkGPT-5.4Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Result
AA-IFBenchSource 73.9%76.6%Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) leads
Frequently Asked Questions (5)

Which is better, GPT-5.4 or Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)?

GPT-5.4 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 74.24 to 59.72. The biggest single separator in this matchup is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), where the scores are 47.600% and 23.103%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, GPT-5.4 or Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)?

Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 73.9 versus 57.6. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Hallucination Rate is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for coding, GPT-5.4 or Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)?

GPT-5.4 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 57.7 versus 51. Inside this category, AA-SciCode is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for math, GPT-5.4 or Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)?

GPT-5.4 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 42.5 versus 18.4. Inside this category, FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3) is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for agentic tasks, GPT-5.4 or Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)?

GPT-5.4 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 77.2 versus 65.4. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 23, 2026

Choose a model with this week’s evidence

Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.

One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.