Head-to-head comparison across 2benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
GPT-4.1 mini
47
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)
72
Pick Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GPT-4.1 mini only becomes the better choice if you need the larger 1M context window or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Coding
+30.5 difference
Knowledge
+9.7 difference
GPT-4.1 mini
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)
$0.4 / $1.6
N/A
80 t/s
N/A
0.76s
N/A
1M
256K
Pick Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GPT-4.1 mini only becomes the better choice if you need the larger 1M context window or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 72 to 47. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)'s sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 54.1 against 23.6.
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) is the reasoning model in the pair, while GPT-4.1 mini is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. GPT-4.1 mini gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 256K for Qwen 3.6 Max (preview).
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 72 to 47.
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 73.9 versus 64.2. GPT-4.1 mini stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 54.1 versus 23.6. GPT-4.1 mini stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.