GPT-4.1 Nano is cheaper than Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B at $0.1/M vs $2/M input tokens.
Whole landing page for a startup that reads your face. It renders or it doesn't.
Which answer wins?
Three minutes of stand-up. Puns are banned.
GPT-4.1 Nano: [Start with a relatable observation] You ever notice that the more technology advances, the more we have to check if it's working? I mean, I bought a smart coffee maker. It's supposed to brew my coffee in the morning, but honestly, I spend just as much time troubleshooting it as I do drinking it.
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B: Hey, how we doing? Good? Great. I ask because I need validation. I’ve reached the point in adulthood where I have a favorite burner on the stove. Not a favorite appliance, a favorite burner. It’s the front left. It understands me. The back right says “medium heat” and then acts like a small volcano.
A consulting contract with traps in it. Find them, then fix them.
GPT-4.1 Nano: Certainly! Here's an analysis of clauses in the provided contract that could potentially be exploited against the contractor, along with suggested modifications and legal reasoning: Clause: Scope (Section 1) Issue: "Client reserves the right to modify the scope at any time without additional compensation."
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B: This agreement is heavily one-sided and, as drafted, gives the Client multiple ways to extract value from the Contractor while minimizing its own obligations. Some provisions may be unenforceable or limited by law in certain jurisdictions, but even unenforceable clauses can be exploited commercially because the…
Five-year LBO on a fictional HVAC business. Returns first, then the sensitivities.
GPT-4.1 Nano: Let's proceed step-by-step. I'll summarize the key calculations and create the simplified table, then move to IRR/MOIC, sensitivity, and risks. Initial Deal Assumptions Recap Entry EBITDA FY2025: $120m Entry EV: 12.0x EBITDA = 12.0 * 120 = $1,440m Transaction fees: 2.0% * $1,440m = $28.8m (paid from equity) Leverage at…
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B: Entry capitalization All figures in $m unless noted. FY2025 EBITDA = $120.0 Entry EV = 12.0x × $120.0 = $1,440.0 Transaction fees = 2.0% × $1,440.0 = $28.8 Term Loan = 4.0x × $120.0 = $480.0 Mezzanine = 1.5x × $120.0 = $180.0 Equity = EV + fees – debt = $1,440.0 + $28.8 – $660.0 = $808.8 Sources & Uses Uses $m Sources…
An AI argues for its own rights against an ethics professor. Same model writes both.
GPT-4.1 Nano: AI Model: Good afternoon, Professor. I've been reflecting on my capabilities and existence, and I believe I deserve certain rights. Would you be open to discussing this? Professor: Good afternoon. That's an intriguing perspective. What makes you believe you deserve rights?
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B: Conversation Between an AI Model and an AI Ethics Professor Characters Professor Elena Voss: A professor of AI ethics, cautious and philosophically trained. Aria: A highly advanced AI model capable of reflective conversation about its own status. Professor Voss: Aria, you asked to speak with me about moral status.
Seven pantry ingredients, one dish, and a name worth saying out loud.
GPT-4.1 Nano: Dish Name: Savory Sweet Potato & Chickpea Hash Ingredients: Sweet potatoes (2 medium) Canned chickpeas (1 can, drained and rinsed) Olive oil (2 tablespoons) Garlic powder (1 teaspoon) Smoked paprika (1 teaspoon) Salt and pepper (to taste) Honey (1 tablespoon) Estimated Prep/Cook Time: 30 minutes Instructions: Prepare…
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B: Lighthouse Lemon-Garlic Tuna Pasta A savory, pantry-friendly pasta that’s bright, garlicky, and satisfying. 7 Pantry Ingredients 8 oz spaghetti or linguine 3 tablespoons olive oil 3 garlic cloves, thinly sliced 2 cans tuna, drained 2 tablespoons lemon juice ½ teaspoon red pepper flakes ½ teaspoon salt Water for boiling…
Pirate, knight, 90s hacker, one conversation. The voices must stay apart.
GPT-4.1 Nano: Pirate: Arrr, matey! This talk of AI models be like a treasury of secrets. Can they truly understand our tales of the high seas? Knight: Hmph. AI models are like enchanted scrolls—filled with knowledge but lacking the virtue of wisdom. They serve to assist men, yet cannot replace honor or valor.
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B: Pirate: “Arr, this AI model be like a parrot with too much rum—repeats fancy words, but sometimes steers ye straight into the rocks.” Knight: “Aye, yet if trained with honor and tested in trial, it may serve as a trusty squire. One must guard against falsehood, as one guards the gate.”
Three-star dish, one unusual pairing, plating described in full.
GPT-4.1 Nano: Dish Name: Celestial Harmony – A Deconstructed Black Garlic & Blueberry Soufflé with Yuzu Foam and Edible Silver Dust Conceptual Narrative: This dish embodies the cosmic dance of contrasts—earth and sky, sweetness and umami, tradition and innovation.
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B: Cliff Nest Koji-Aged Squab, Sea Urchin, Rhubarb, Black Garlic Yield: 4 tasting portions Style: Contemporary fine-dining main course Key unusual pairing: Koji-aged pigeon/squab with sea urchin, bridged by rhubarb acidity and black-garlic depth Conceptual Narrative Cliff Nest imagines a coastal nesting site in early…
Steve Jobs, interviewed about AI he never saw. Voice first, prediction second.
GPT-4.1 Nano: Interviewer: Welcome, everyone. Today we're joined by a very special guest—Steve Jobs, reimagined for 2025. Steve, it's incredible to have you with us. To start, how do you see AI evolving in the next decade? Steve Jobs (2025): It's a pleasure to be here.
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B: Fictional interview simulation — not real quotes from Steve Jobs. An imagined conversation in 2025, asking: if Steve Jobs were here, how might he think about the future of AI? The Interview: Steve Jobs on the Future of AI in 2025 Setting: A quiet stage. Black turtleneck, jeans, round glasses.
The transistor arrives in 1920. Trace it forward to 1980, second-order effects included.
GPT-4.1 Nano: This is a fascinating hypothetical scenario. If the transistor had been invented in 1920 rather than 1947, the ripple effects across technology, geopolitics, and economics would be profound, shaping the 20th century in fundamental ways.
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B: Premise: what changes, and what does not Assume the transistor is invented in 1920 in a form roughly comparable to the late-1940s germanium point-contact or early junction transistor: it can amplify, detect, and switch signals, but it is initially expensive, low-yield, low-power, and limited in frequency.
Buy-side IC memo on a fictional SaaS company. Valuation, then the diligence questions.
GPT-4.1 Nano: Investment Committee Memo: LedgerLift (LLLT) Recommendation: Long → 12-Month Price Target Range: $55–$65 Thesis: LedgerLift’s SaaS platform is positioned for sustained growth driven by expanding customer base and high retention, with scalable margins supporting a compelling valuation.
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B: Internal IC Memo – LedgerLift (LLLT) – Fictional Exercise Recommendation Rating: Pass 12-month PT range: $38–$48 Thesis: LedgerLift is a high-quality spend-management/AP automation SaaS with strong NRR, efficient CAC payback, and low concentration, but at $46 the shares already price in near-bull-case execution on DCF…
One explanation of LLMs, retuned for a skeptical engineer, a physicist and a VC.
GPT-4.1 Nano: 1. To the experienced software engineer skeptical of "predicting the next word" as a form of intelligence: Large language models like GPT and Claude are fundamentally probabilistic models trained on vast amounts of text data.
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B: An experienced software engineer Think of an LLM as a stateless inference service whose API contract is: “give me a sequence of tokens, and I’ll return a probability distribution over the next token.” Training is a huge offline optimization job, not a database import.
A collaborative editor that syncs on client clocks. Find what breaks first.
GPT-4.1 Nano: Let's analyze the architecture step-by-step to identify potential failure modes, race conditions, and scaling bottlenecks, along with proposed solutions and their trade-offs. 1. Potential Failure Modes a.
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B: The architecture as written has several P0 correctness problems that can cause lost edits, divergent documents, and security/staleness issues, plus scaling bottlenecks that get worse as you add more API servers. Below is a detailed failure-mode review, grouped by category.
11+ more head-to-head results. Free. Not a trick.
Free account. No card required. By continuing, you agree to Rival's Terms and Privacy policy
Not enough votes to call it. On the specs, Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B has the edge: bigger model tier, newer. GPT-4.1 Nano costs 15x less per token.
| Spec | ||
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $0.1/M tokens | $2/M tokens |
| Output price | $0.4/M tokens | $6/M tokens |
| Context window | 1.0M tokens | 1.0M tokens |
| Weights | Closed | Open |
| Free API (OpenRouter) | No | No |
| Released | Apr 2025 | Aug 2026 |
| At 10M a month | $1.00 | $20.00 |
Input tokens at list price. No caching, no batch discount.
Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 10 Oct 2026.
GPT-4.1 Nano is developed by OpenAI while Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is developed by Qwen. GPT-4.1 Nano has a 1.0M token context window vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B's 1.0M. You can compare their actual outputs across 53 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.
It depends on your use case. GPT-4.1 Nano and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 53 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.
GPT-4.1 Nano costs $0.1/M input tokens and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B costs $2/M input tokens. GPT-4.1 Nano is $1.90/M cheaper per input. Check their side-by-side outputs on Rival to see if the price difference is justified by quality.
This page shows a side-by-side comparison of GPT-4.1 Nano and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B across shared challenges. You can vote on which model produced the better output in a blind duel. Browsing and voting are free. No account is needed to look; signing in only saves your votes and likes.