Skip to main content

Model comparison

GPT-5.4 Pro vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 3 shared benchmark results across 3 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

60.62/100
Margin
9.3pts
← winning
51.36/100
2 category wins2 category wins

Verified leaderboard positions: GPT-5.4 Pro unranked; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B #31

BenchAlign evidence: GPT-5.4 Pro estimated; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B estimated. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. GPT-5.4 Pro and Qwen3.6-35B-A3B share 3 comparable benchmark results. 4 of 8 categories are comparable. 9 results are unique to GPT-5.4 Pro; 55 to Qwen3.6-35B-A3B.

Updated July 15, 2026
Shared results
3
GPT-5.4 Pro only
9
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B only
55
Comparable categories
4 / 8

Pick GPT-5.4 Pro if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3.6-35B-A3B only becomes the better choice if mathematics is the priority.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 3 shared benchmark results across 3 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 Pro is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 83 to 59. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

GPT-5.4 Pro's sharpest advantage is in agentic, where it averages 89.3 against 51.5. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is HLE, 58.7% to 21.4%. Qwen3.6-35B-A3B does hit back in mathematics, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.

GPT-5.4 Pro gives you the larger context window at 1.05M, compared with 262K for Qwen3.6-35B-A3B.

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 Pro and Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
CategoryGPT-5.4 ProΔQwen3.6-35B-A3B
MathGPT-5.4 Pro46.9Margin 41.3Qwen3.6-35B-A3B88.2
AgenticGPT-5.4 Pro89.3Margin 37.8Qwen3.6-35B-A3B51.5
MultimodalGPT-5.4 Pro94.0Margin 17.7Qwen3.6-35B-A3B76.3
KnowledgeGPT-5.4 Pro48.4Margin 3.4Qwen3.6-35B-A3B51.8
CodingGPT-5.4 ProNot measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.6-35B-A3B73.8
ReasoningGPT-5.4 Pro83.3MarginNo overlapQwen3.6-35B-A3BNot measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · GPT-5.4 ProB · Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
  1. HLE

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 58.7%B 21.4%
    Winner: GPT-5.4 ProΔ 37.3
    HLE: GPT-5.4 Pro scored 58.7%; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B scored 21.4%. GPT-5.4 Pro wins this benchmark.
  2. MMMU-Pro

    Multimodal
    Source ↗
    A 94%B 75.3%
    Winner: GPT-5.4 ProΔ 18.7
    MMMU-Pro: GPT-5.4 Pro scored 94%; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B scored 75.3%. GPT-5.4 Pro wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricGPT-5.4 ProQwen3.6-35B-A3BComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGPT-5.4 Pro$30 input / $180 outputQwen3.6-35B-A3BNot availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondGPT-5.4 Pro74 tok/sQwen3.6-35B-A3BNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGPT-5.4 Pro151.79 sQwen3.6-35B-A3BNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGPT-5.4 Pro1.05MQwen3.6-35B-A3B262KGPT-5.4 Pro lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticGPT-5.4 Pro wins
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 ProQwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
BrowseCompSource 89.3%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 51.5%Not comparable
Claw-EvalSource 68.7%Not comparable
QwenClawBenchSource 52.6%Not comparable
QwenWebBenchSource 1397Not comparable
τ³-bench resultsSource 67.2%Not comparable
VITA-BenchSource 35.6%Not comparable
DeepPlanningSource 25.9%Not comparable
ToolathlonSource 26.9%Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource 62.8%Not comparable
WideResearchSource 60.1%Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 21.4%Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 95.3%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 27.4%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 1049Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 42.65%Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 ProQwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 73.4%Not comparable
SWE MultilingualSource 67.2%Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 49.5%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 51.5%Not comparable
LiveCodeBenchSource 80.4%Not comparable
NL2RepoSource 29.4%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 41.9%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench HardSource 34.8%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 35.8%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 ProQwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
ARC-AGI-2Source 83.3%Not comparable
CritPtSource 30.0%0.3%GPT-5.4 Pro leads
AA-LCRSource 63.7%Not comparable
KnowledgeQwen3.6-35B-A3B wins
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 ProQwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
HLESource 58.7%21.4%GPT-5.4 Pro leads
FrontierScienceSource 36.7%Not comparable
FrontierScience ResearchSource 36.7%Not comparable
HLE w/o toolsSource 42.7%Not comparable
MMLU-ProSource 85.2%Not comparable
SuperGPQASource 64.7%Not comparable
C-EvalSource 90%Not comparable
GPQASource 86%Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 31.6%Not comparable
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 84.1%Not comparable
AA-HLESource 20.2%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -21.4%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 18.9%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 49.7%Not comparable
MathQwen3.6-35B-A3B wins
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 ProQwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
IPhO 2025 (Theory)Source 93.5%Not comparable
FrontierMath (legacy)Source 50%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 50.000%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 37.500%Not comparable
HMMT Feb 2025Source 90.7%Not comparable
HMMT Nov 2025Source 89.1%Not comparable
HMMT Feb 2026Source 83.6%Not comparable
MMAnswerBenchSource 78.9%Not comparable
AIME26Source 92.7%Not comparable
MultimodalGPT-5.4 Pro wins
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 ProQwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
MMMU-ProSource 94%75.3%GPT-5.4 Pro leads
MMMUSource 81.7%Not comparable
RealWorldQASource 85.3%Not comparable
OmniDocBench 1.5Source 89.9%Not comparable
CharXivSource 78%Not comparable
SimpleVQASource 58.9%Not comparable
CC-OCRSource 81.9%Not comparable
AI2D_TESTSource 92.7%Not comparable
RefCOCO (avg)Source 92.0%Not comparable
ODINW13Source 50.8%Not comparable
Video-MME (with subtitle)Source 86.6%Not comparable
Video-MME (w/o subtitle)Source 82.5%Not comparable
VideoMMMUSource 83.7%Not comparable
MLVU (M-Avg)Source 86.2%Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource 75.0%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 ProQwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
AA-IFBenchSource 64.4%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (5)

Which is better, GPT-5.4 Pro or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?

GPT-5.4 Pro is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 83 to 59. The biggest single separator in this matchup is HLE, where the scores are 58.7% and 21.4%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, GPT-5.4 Pro or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 51.8 versus 48.4. Inside this category, HLE is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for math, GPT-5.4 Pro or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 88.2 versus 46.9. GPT-5.4 Pro stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.

Which is better for agentic tasks, GPT-5.4 Pro or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?

GPT-5.4 Pro has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 89.3 versus 51.5. Qwen3.6-35B-A3B stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.

Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, GPT-5.4 Pro or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?

GPT-5.4 Pro has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 94 versus 76.3. Inside this category, MMMU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 15, 2026

The AI models change fast. We track them for you.

A weekly brief for engineers and researchers covering new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.

Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.