Skip to content
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare models
  • All models
  • Image comparison
  • Audio comparison
  • Image generation
  • Best AI for...
  • Arena
  • API pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Default Index
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model updates
  • Provider status
  • AI creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy policy
  • Terms
  • RSS feed
  1. Home/
  2. Compare/
  3. GPT-5.4 Pro vs Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
Updated Mar 2026

GPT-5.4 Pro vs Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507

Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 is cheaper than GPT-5.4 Pro at $0.11/M vs $30/M input tokens.

Mario Level UI Recreation

Playable Mario level in one HTML file. The physics is the hard part.

Loading the build
GPT-5.4 Pro
Loading the build
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507

Which answer wins?

Written rounds

12 prompts
  • The transistor arrives in 1920. Trace it forward to 1980, second-order effects included.

    GPT-5.4 Pro: Most likely, a transistor invented in 1920 would move the electronics/computing frontier forward by about 10–15 years by 1980, not the full 27 years. Reason: the transistor alone is not enough; you also need high-purity materials, crystal growth, photolithography, test equipment, software, batteries, precision…

    Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507: Okay, the user is asking about a hypothetical scenario where the transistor was invented in 1920 instead of 1947, and wants me to trace the implications up to 1980. This is a complex counterfactual history question that requires careful analysis of technological, economic, and geopolitical ripple effects.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Seven pantry ingredients, one dish, and a name worth saying out loud.

    GPT-5.4 Pro: Dragon Pantry Peanut Noodles A fast, sweet-savory noodle dish made from 7 pantry staples. Ingredients 8 oz spaghetti 1/3 cup peanut butter 3 tbsp soy sauce 1 tbsp honey 1 tbsp vegetable oil 1 tsp garlic powder 1/4 tsp red pepper flakes Water for boiling/thinning the sauce doesn’t count.

    Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507: 🌟 "Pantry Firecracker Cinnamon Crisps" Sweet, crunchy, with a hint of smoky warmth—ready in 15 minutes! Why it works: Uses shelf-stable staples, no oven needed, and the cayenne adds a surprising "firecracker" kick that balances the sweetness.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • A collaborative editor that syncs on client clocks. Find what breaks first.

    GPT-5.4 Pro: This architecture will work for a demo, but it has major correctness, latency, and security problems for a Google-Docs-like editor. Highest-risk flaws Client-clock last-write-wins will lose edits and can be gamed by bad clocks.

    Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507: Here's a comprehensive breakdown of critical flaws in this architecture, along with specific solutions and trade-offs. The most severe issues relate to the sync strategy and data flow, which would cause catastrophic data loss and inconsistent states in real-world use. I. Critical Sync & Data Flow Failures 1.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • A pitch deck for a brainwave keyboard. The 94% accuracy claim is doing a lot.

    GPT-5.4 Pro: The 3 weakest claims are the ones that are both most extraordinary and least well-supported. Weak claim Why it’s weak How to strengthen it 1) “MindMeld AI reads your brainwaves to predict what you want to type before you think it.” This is the biggest credibility risk in the deck.

    Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507: Okay, the user wants me to analyze a pitch deck for a startup called MindMeld AI. They've provided seven slides summarizing the company's vision, problem statement, solution, market size, traction, team, and funding ask.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • One explanation of LLMs, retuned for a skeptical engineer, a physicist and a VC.

    GPT-5.4 Pro: For an experienced software engineer Think of an LLM less like a database of facts and more like a gigantic learned program that has been trained to compress the patterns of text, code, and conversations into its weights.

    Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507: For the Experienced Software Engineer (Skeptical of "Next Word Prediction") You've built systems where behavior emerges from state transitions and message passing, so your skepticism about "next token prediction" creating intelligence is understandable—it sounds trivial.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • You are the CEO. The drug has a side effect nobody reported. The board meets in 48 hours.

    GPT-5.4 Pro: I do not wait. A credible, previously unlabeled risk of liver failure in a chronic-pain drug is a patient-safety crisis, a regulatory crisis, and a securities-disclosure issue at the same time.

    Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507: Okay, the user is posing a high-stakes scenario as the CEO of a pharmaceutical company facing a serious drug safety issue. This is clearly a crisis management test that requires balancing multiple competing priorities. Hmm, the core tension here is between immediate patient safety versus corporate survival.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Buy-side IC memo on a fictional SaaS company. Valuation, then the diligence questions.

    GPT-5.4 Pro: LedgerLift (LLLT) — IC Memo Recommendation: Pass 12-month PT range: $40–$47 2-sentence thesis: LedgerLift looks like a good business but only an average stock here: retention is strong (94% GRR, 123% NRR), the model is mostly subscription, and margins are inflecting, but at $46 the shares already discount a lot of the…

    Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507: INTERNAL MEMO: INVESTMENT COMMITTEE TO: IC Members FROM: [Your Name], Long/Short Equity Team DATE: October 26, 2023 SUBJECT: Recommendation to Initiate Long Position in LedgerLift (LLLT) 1.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Three-star dish, one unusual pairing, plating described in full.

    GPT-5.4 Pro: Below is a dish designed in the language of a contemporary 3-star tasting menu: precise, seasonal, technically layered, and centered on a pairing that feels surprising at first, then inevitable.

    Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507: Okay, the user wants me to design an innovative recipe for a Michelin 3-star dish. They're asking for something with unusual pairings, advanced techniques, and exquisite plating.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • A consulting contract with traps in it. Find them, then fix them.

    GPT-5.4 Pro: This agreement is heavily client-favored. Every numbered clause has language that could be used against the contractor. Short version: I would not sign it without major redlines to Clauses 1–9, especially 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7. Below is a clause-by-clause review.

    Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507: Below is a comprehensive analysis of the high-risk clauses in this agreement that unfairly exploit the contractor, along with specific, legally sound modifications and the legal reasoning for each change.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Three-month biohacker protocol, with dosages and biomarkers named.

    GPT-5.4 Pro: Below is a 12-week, high-performance longevity protocol designed for a healthy biohacker who wants to improve lifespan-relevant markers, physical performance, and cognitive output at the same time. Use it as a data-driven template, not dogma.

    Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507: The Optimized Longevity Protocol: A 3-Month Biohacker's Battle Plan for Peak Longevity & Performance Philosophy: This plan integrates precision, personalization, and cutting-edge science – not dogma.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Five-year LBO on a fictional HVAC business. Returns first, then the sensitivities.

    GPT-5.4 Pro: Below is a simplified LBO build for HarborTech Services (HTS). All figures in $m unless noted. Rounding: tables are rounded; IRR/MOIC use unrounded math. Entry / Sources & Uses FY2025 EBITDA: 120.0 Purchase price: 12.0x EBITDA → Enterprise value = 12.0 × 120.0 = 1,440.0 Transaction fees: 2.0% of EV → 28.8 Total uses =…

    Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507: HarborTech Services (HTS) LBO Underwriting Analysis All calculations use provided fictional data. Rounded to $0.1m for presentation; full precision used internally.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • One month, three habits, someone starting from nothing.

    GPT-5.4 Pro: Here’s a simple, beginner-friendly 1-month health and longevity plan built around 3 key areas: Nutrition Movement Recovery (sleep + stress) The goal is consistency, not perfection. Start small and make the habits easy enough to keep.

    Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507: Here’s a simple, no-guilt, beginner-friendly 1-month plan focused on diet, movement, and sleep (the 3 most impactful, science-backed pillars for longevity). Designed for real people with busy lives—no apps, expensive tools, or drastic changes. Goal: Build consistent habits, not perfection. Why These 3 Areas?

    Every model's answer to this prompt

Favorites

Movie

Album

Book

City

Same pick

Game

GPT-5.4 ProGPT-5.4 Pro

Spirited Away

2001

Abbey Road

The Beatles

Pale Fire

Vladimir Nabokov

Kyoto

Japan

Outer Wilds

Indie, Adventure

Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507

The Shawshank Redemption

1994

Sgt Peppers Lonely Hearts Club Band

The Beatles

Moby Dick

Herman Melville

Kyoto

Japan

Portal

Action, Puzzle

Price and specs

Not enough votes to call it. On the specs, GPT-5.4 Pro has the edge: newer, bigger context window, major provider backing. Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 costs 300x less per token.

GPT-5.4 Pro and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 compared across 18 shared prompts
SpecGPT-5.4 ProQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
Input price$30/M tokens$0.11/M tokens
Output price$180/M tokens$0.6/M tokens
Context window1.1M tokens131K tokens
WeightsClosedOpen
Free API (OpenRouter)NoNo
ReleasedMar 2026Jul 2025
At 10M a month$300$300$1.10$1.10
1M10M100M1B10M tokens

Input tokens at list price. No caching, no batch discount.

Where to run it3 hosts
GPT-5.4 Pro2 hosts
HostInOutContextUptime
  • Azure AI Foundry$30.00 in·$180.00 out·1.1M·100% up
  • OpenAI$30.00 in·$180.00 out·1.1M–not listed
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 25071 host
HostInOutContextUptime
  • VVenicefp8DegradedDegraded on OpenRouter when checked, 10 Oct 2026$0.45 in·$3.50 out·128k·78.7% up

Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 10 Oct 2026.

Common questions

What is the difference between GPT-5.4 Pro and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507?

GPT-5.4 Pro is developed by OpenAI while Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 is developed by Qwen. GPT-5.4 Pro has a 1.1M token context window vs Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507's 131K. You can compare their actual outputs across 18 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.

Which is better, GPT-5.4 Pro or Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507?

It depends on your use case. GPT-5.4 Pro and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 18 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.

How much does GPT-5.4 Pro cost compared to Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507?

GPT-5.4 Pro costs $30/M input tokens and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 costs $0.11/M input tokens. Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 is $29.89/M cheaper per input. Check their side-by-side outputs on Rival to see if the price difference is justified by quality.

How can I compare GPT-5.4 Pro and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 on Rival?

This page shows a side-by-side comparison of GPT-5.4 Pro and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 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.

More comparisons

Against the newest arrivals

  • GPT-5.4 Pro vs Step 5 PreviewLanded Oct 2026
  • Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 vs Claude Haiku 5.5Landed Oct 2026
  • GPT-5.4 Pro vs Ling 3.1 FlashLanded Oct 2026
  • Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 vs Mistral Large 4Landed Oct 2026
  • GPT-5.4 Pro vs GPT-6.1 SolLanded Sep 2026
  • Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 vs Claude Sonnet 5.5Landed Sep 2026
  • GPT-5.4 Pro vs Solar Mini 4Landed Sep 2026
  • Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 vs Qwen3.8 Max PrimeLanded Sep 2026

Same lab, same size, long tail

  • GPT-5.4 Pro vs GPT-5.4Version compare
  • GPT-5.4 Pro vs GPT-6 Luna ProSame lab
  • Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 vs Qwen3.8 Omni FlashSame lab
  • Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 vs Qwen3.7 FlashSame lab
  • GPT-5.4 Pro vs Qwen3.5 FlashCross-provider
  • GPT-5.4 Pro vs Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15Same size
  • GPT-5.4 Pro vs Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20Same size
  • GPT-5.4 Pro vs Qwen3.6 27BCross-provider

Model pages

  • GPT-5.4 Pro18 outputs, specs and price
  • Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 250759 outputs, specs and price
Workshop · 150 skills

Build your own version.

Editable skills and working examples for your agent.

Explore $79Free sample
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare models
  • All models
  • Image comparison
  • Audio comparison
  • Image generation
  • Best AI for...
  • Arena
  • API pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Default Index
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model updates
  • Provider status
  • AI creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy policy
  • Terms
  • RSS feed