Head-to-head comparison across 2benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
GPT-5.4 mini
73
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)
72
Pick GPT-5.4 mini if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority.
Agentic
+0.2 difference
Knowledge
+16.5 difference
GPT-5.4 mini
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)
$0.75 / $4.5
N/A
201 t/s
N/A
3.85s
N/A
400K
256K
Pick GPT-5.4 mini if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority.
GPT-5.4 mini finishes one point ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 73 to 72. That is enough to call, but not enough to treat as a blowout. This matchup comes down to a few meaningful edges rather than one model dominating the board.
GPT-5.4 mini's sharpest advantage is in agentic, where it averages 65.6 against 65.4. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 60% to 65.4%. 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 mini gives you the larger context window at 400K, compared with 256K for Qwen 3.6 Max (preview).
GPT-5.4 mini is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 73 to 72. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 60% and 65.4%.
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 73.9 versus 57.4. GPT-5.4 mini stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
GPT-5.4 mini has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 65.6 versus 65.4. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.