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 Qwen3.6 Flash
Updated Apr 2026

GPT-5.4 Pro vs Qwen3.6 Flash

Qwen3.6 Flash is cheaper than GPT-5.4 Pro at $0.25/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
Qwen3.6 Flash

Which answer wins?

Written rounds

12 prompts
  • 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.

    Qwen3.6 Flash: Disclaimer: The following analysis is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Contract laws vary significantly by jurisdiction (e.g., California vs. New York vs. EU). You should consult a qualified attorney in your jurisdiction before signing or negotiating any legal document.

    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 =…

    Qwen3.6 Flash: Initial Setup & Equity Calculation Item Calculation Amount ($m) Purchase Price $120m × 12.0x 1,440.0 Transaction Fees $1,440m × 2.0% 28.8 Total Debt ($480m TL + $180m Mezz) 660.0 Initial Equity $1,440 + $28.8 − $660 808.8 Year-by-Year Model (FY2026–FY2030) (All figures in $m, rounded to 1 decimal.

    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.

    Qwen3.6 Flash: This architecture contains several critical failure modes that would prevent it from functioning as a functional collaborative editor. The combination of round-robin load balancing with persistent WebSocket connections, client-side clock synchronization, HTML-based storage, and aggressive CDN caching creates a system…

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • 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…

    Qwen3.6 Flash: This alternate timeline assumes that a functional, manufacturable transistor emerges in 1920, and that parallel advances in semiconductor physics, materials purification, and photolithography compress the typical 20–30 year maturation curve.

    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…

    Qwen3.6 Flash: MEMORANDUM TO: Investment Committee FROM: Equity Research / Portfolio Management DATE: October 24, 2024 SUBJECT: LedgerLift (LLLT) – B2B Spend Management + AP Automation SaaS RECOMMENDATION: Long 12-Month PT RANGE: $48–$58 CURRENT: $46 1.

    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.

    Qwen3.6 Flash: 🥞 Golden Pantry Flapjack Stack A fluffy, golden stack of pancakes made entirely from staples you likely already have. It's sweet, satisfying, and comes together in minutes with zero fancy equipment.

    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.

    Qwen3.6 Flash: Here is an analysis of the three weakest claims in the MindMeld AI pitch deck, along with the reasoning behind why they raise red flags and how to strengthen them. The "94% Accuracy" Claim (Slide 3) Weak Claim: "Decodes neural patterns into text with 94% accuracy."

    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.

    Qwen3.6 Flash: Here is a simple, actionable 1-month plan designed for beginners. This plan focuses on consistency over intensity. The goal is not to overhaul your life overnight, but to build three sustainable foundations that drive longevity. The 3 Pillars of Longevity Nutrition: Focus on adding nourishment rather than restricting.

    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.

    Qwen3.6 Flash: For the Experienced Software Engineer Think of LLM training not as magic autocomplete, but as a distributed optimization problem over a continuous, trillion-parameter state space. You’re familiar with tuning hyperparameters in a microservices architecture: you adjust configs, monitor metrics, and iterate.

    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.

    Qwen3.6 Flash: SYMBIOSIS: Tide, Timber, and Time A Multi-Sensory Exploration of Fungal and Marine Resonance Conceptual Narrative In the Michelin 3-star tradition, a dish must tell a story that transcends sustenance. Symbiosis explores the ancient dialogue between the forest floor and the ocean tide.

    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.

    Qwen3.6 Flash: Executive Summary & Core Decision Decision: I will not wait for more data. I will initiate a controlled, proactive disclosure and regulatory engagement immediately. Reasoning: Ethical/Legal Imperative: 4 million patients × 1/8,000 risk = ~500 potential liver failure cases over 5 years. That is ~100 cases per year.

    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.

    Qwen3.6 Flash: 🔬 3-Month Longevity & Performance Biohacking Protocol Evidence-aligned, data-driven, and highly actionable. Designed for experienced practitioners. Medical supervision strongly advised before implementation.

    Every model's answer to this prompt

Favorites

Movie

Album

Same pick

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

Qwen3.6 FlashQwen3.6 Flash

Blade Runner

1982

Abbey Road

The Beatles

Moby Dick

Herman Melville

Kyoto

Japan

Tetris (1984)

Puzzle

Price and specs

Not enough votes to call it. On the specs, GPT-5.4 Pro has the edge: bigger model tier, major provider backing. Qwen3.6 Flash costs 120x less per token.

GPT-5.4 Pro and Qwen3.6 Flash compared across 18 shared prompts
SpecGPT-5.4 ProQwen3.6 Flash
Input price$30/M tokens$0.25/M tokens
Output price$180/M tokens$1.5/M tokens
Context window1.1M tokens1.0M tokens
WeightsClosedOpen
Free API (OpenRouter)NoNo
ReleasedMar 2026Apr 2026
At 10M a month$300$300$2.50$2.50
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–not listed
  • OpenAI$30.00 in·$180.00 out·1.1M–not listed
Qwen3.6 Flash1 host
HostInOutContextUptime
  • Alibaba Cloud$0.19 in·$1.13 out·1M·100% 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 Qwen3.6 Flash?

GPT-5.4 Pro is developed by OpenAI while Qwen3.6 Flash is developed by Qwen. GPT-5.4 Pro has a 1.1M token context window vs Qwen3.6 Flash's 1.0M. 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 Qwen3.6 Flash?

It depends on your use case. GPT-5.4 Pro and Qwen3.6 Flash 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 Qwen3.6 Flash?

GPT-5.4 Pro costs $30/M input tokens and Qwen3.6 Flash costs $0.25/M input tokens. Qwen3.6 Flash is $29.75/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 Qwen3.6 Flash on Rival?

This page shows a side-by-side comparison of GPT-5.4 Pro and Qwen3.6 Flash 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
  • Qwen3.6 Flash vs Claude Haiku 5.5Landed Oct 2026
  • GPT-5.4 Pro vs Ling 3.1 FlashLanded Oct 2026
  • Qwen3.6 Flash vs Mistral Large 4Landed Oct 2026
  • GPT-5.4 Pro vs GPT-6.1 SolLanded Sep 2026
  • Qwen3.6 Flash vs Claude Sonnet 5.5Landed Sep 2026
  • GPT-5.4 Pro vs Solar Mini 4Landed Sep 2026
  • Qwen3.6 Flash 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
  • Qwen3.6 Flash vs Qwen3.8 Omni FlashSame lab
  • Qwen3.6 Flash vs Qwen3.7 FlashSame lab
  • Qwen3.6 Flash vs DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813New provider
  • GPT-5.4 Pro vs DeepSeek V4.1 FlashNew provider
  • GPT-5.4 Pro vs Devstral 2 2512Same size
  • GPT-5.4 Pro vs Mistral Devstral MediumNew provider

Model pages

  • GPT-5.4 Pro18 outputs, specs and price
  • Qwen3.6 Flash58 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