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 Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Updated Aug 2026

GPT-5.4 Pro vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B

Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is cheaper than GPT-5.4 Pro at $2/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
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B

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…

    Qwen3.8 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.

    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.

    Qwen3.8 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…

    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.

    Qwen3.8 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…

    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.

    Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B: The three weakest claims are the ones most likely to collapse under investor diligence: “before you think it,” “94% accuracy… any language, any device,” and the $180B TAM claim. They are weak because they are either scientifically implausible, under-specified, or logically inconsistent with the market evidence cited.

    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.

    Qwen3.8 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…

    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.

    Qwen3.8 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.

    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…

    Qwen3.8 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…

    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.

    Qwen3.8 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.

    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 =…

    Qwen3.8 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…

    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.

    Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B: My position as CEO I would treat this as a patient-safety, regulatory, legal, corporate-governance, and financial crisis simultaneously. The core decision is not “disclose versus protect the stock price.”

    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.

    Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B: 12-Week “Longevity + Performance” Biohacker Protocol Goal: improve healthspan markers, metabolic flexibility, strength, VO₂max, sleep, stress resilience, and cognitive output over 3 months. Important: This is an educational, high-level biohacking framework—not medical advice. It is not appropriate for everyone.

    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.

    Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B: Here’s a simple, beginner-friendly 1-month health and longevity plan focused on three key areas: diet, movement, and sleep/stress. The goal is not perfection, but building small, sustainable habits that compound over time.

    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

Qwen3.8 2.4T A95BQwen3.8 2.4T A95B

Arrival

2016

In Rainbows

Radiohead

Le petit prince

Antoine de Saint-Exupéry

Kyoto

Japan

Portal 2

Shooter, Puzzle

Price and specs

GPT-5.4 Pro and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B compared across 18 shared prompts
SpecGPT-5.4 ProQwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Input price$30/M tokens$2/M tokens
Output price$180/M tokens$6/M tokens
Context window1.1M tokens1.0M tokens
WeightsClosedOpen
Free API (OpenRouter)NoNo
ReleasedMar 2026Aug 2026
At 10M a month$300$300$20.00$20.00
1M10M100M1B10M tokens

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

Where to run it9 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
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B7 hosts
HostInOutContextUptime
  • Alibaba Cloud$2.00 in·$6.00 out·1M·100% up
  • DDeepInfrafp4$2.00 in·$6.00 out·262k·99.5% up
  • Modal$2.00 in·$6.00 out·1M·99.7% up
  • NNovita$2.00 in·$6.00 out·1M·100% up
  • SSiliconFlowfp8$2.00 in·$6.00 out·1M·100% up
  • TTogether$2.00 in·$6.00 out·1M·100% up
1 more hostFewer hosts
  • VVenice$2.00 in·$6.00 out·262k·99.2% 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 Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B?

GPT-5.4 Pro is developed by OpenAI while Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is developed by Qwen. GPT-5.4 Pro has a 1.1M token context window vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B'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 Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B?

It depends on your use case. GPT-5.4 Pro and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B 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 Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B?

GPT-5.4 Pro costs $30/M input tokens and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B costs $2/M input tokens. Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is $28.00/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 Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B on Rival?

This page shows a side-by-side comparison of GPT-5.4 Pro 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.

More comparisons

Against the newest arrivals

  • GPT-5.4 Pro vs Step 5 PreviewLanded Oct 2026
  • Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs Claude Haiku 5.5Landed Oct 2026
  • GPT-5.4 Pro vs Ling 3.1 FlashLanded Oct 2026
  • Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs Mistral Large 4Landed Oct 2026
  • GPT-5.4 Pro vs GPT-6.1 SolLanded Sep 2026
  • Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs Claude Sonnet 5.5Landed Sep 2026
  • GPT-5.4 Pro vs Solar Mini 4Landed Sep 2026
  • Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B 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
  • Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs Qwen3.8 27BVersion compare
  • Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs Qwen3.8 Omni FlashSame lab
  • GPT-5.4 Pro vs Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20Same size
  • GPT-5.4 Pro vs Qwen3.6 27BCross-provider
  • GPT-5.4 Pro vs Qwen3.6 35B A3BCross-provider
  • GPT-5.4 Pro vs Qwen3.6 FlashCross-provider

Model pages

  • GPT-5.4 Pro18 outputs, specs and price
  • Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B58 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