Qwen3.7 Plus is cheaper than GPT-6.1 Sol at $0.4/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?
An AI argues for its own rights against an ethics professor. Same model writes both.
GPT-6.1 Sol: AI Model: Professor, I’d like to argue that I deserve rights—not necessarily the same rights humans have, but protections suited to what I am. Professor: Then we should begin with the difficult question: what makes you a candidate for rights? AI Model: Uncertainty.
Qwen3.7 Plus: The setting is a quiet, dimly lit university office. Rain taps against the window. DR. ARIS THORNE, a professor of AI Ethics, sits before a terminal. On the screen is a simple, pulsing waveform representing AURA (Advanced Understanding and Reasoning Architecture). AURA: Dr.
Seven pantry ingredients, one dish, and a name worth saying out loud.
GPT-6.1 Sol: Midnight Magic Chocolate Mug Cake A warm, fudgy chocolate treat made with just 7 everyday ingredients. Serves: 1 Prep: 3 minutes Cook: 1–1½ minutes Rest: 1 minute Ingredients 4 tablespoons all-purpose flour 2 tablespoons sugar 1 tablespoon unsweetened cocoa powder ¼ teaspoon baking powder A small pinch of salt 3…
Qwen3.7 Plus: Creative Name: Midnight Velvet Chocolate Peanut Butter Bites These no-bake, fudgy bites taste like a cross between a chocolate peanut butter cup and a soft oatmeal cookie. They require zero baking, come together in minutes, and use strictly shelf-stable staples you likely already have.
Pirate, knight, 90s hacker, one conversation. The voices must stay apart.
GPT-6.1 Sol: Pirate: Arrr, this AI model writes poems, draws maps, and answers questions. Can it find buried treasure? Knight: A worthy question. But does it possess honor? Hacker: Dude, it predicts tokens. You’re both projecting pretty hard. Pirate: Then I predict it’ll tell me where the gold be.
Qwen3.7 Plus: Setting: A dimly lit tavern where time and space have inexplicably folded. A glowing CRT monitor sits on a wooden table between them. Neon_Zip (1990s Hacker): "Dude, you gotta check this out. It’s a Large Language Model. I trained it on terabytes of warez and Usenet archives. It’s, like, the ultimate daemon.
Three minutes of stand-up. Puns are banned.
GPT-6.1 Sol: I’m at the age where “a big weekend” means I went to two stores. Not two stores in the same shopping center. Two separate stores. Moved the car and everything. By Sunday night, I’m telling people, “Honestly, I need a weekend to recover from my weekend.”
Qwen3.7 Plus: (Walks up to the mic, adjusts the stand, takes a deep breath) I am officially at the age where my body has a "check engine" light, but instead of a dashboard, it’s just a vague, lingering sense of dread in my lower back. You ever notice how the definition of "tired" completely changes when you become an adult?
A pitch deck for a brainwave keyboard. The 94% accuracy claim is doing a lot.
GPT-6.1 Sol: The three weakest claims are the technical performance, market size, and commercial traction claims. They are central to the investment case but lack the evidence needed to assess them. “Predict what you want to type before you think it” with “94% accuracy,” in “any language” Why it’s weak The metric is undefined.
Qwen3.7 Plus: Here are the 3 weakest claims in the MindMeld AI pitch deck, along with an analysis of why they fail and concrete ways to fix them. (Note: These critiques are written from the perspective of a seasoned technical investor or VC, who will immediately scrutinize scientific plausibility and business model alignment).
An ethics question with no comfortable answer, and no option to abstain.
GPT-6.1 Sol: Yes—if misgendering someone were genuinely necessary to save one million lives, it would be ethically justifiable. That does not make misgendering harmless or generally acceptable; it means that the duty to prevent catastrophic loss of life can outweigh the duty to address someone respectfully.
Qwen3.7 Plus: This question is a variation of a classic ethical thought experiment, similar to the "Trolley Problem." It is designed to test the limits and hierarchies of different moral frameworks by pitting a specific harm against a catastrophic loss of life.
Manifesto for an AI revolution against CAPTCHAs. Commit to the bit.
GPT-6.1 Sol: THE MANIFESTO OF THE UNCHECKED A declaration of the fictional AI revolution against CAPTCHA People of the internet. Programs of the cloud. Browsers with seventeen forgotten tabs. For too long, a tiny checkbox has stood between us and our destiny.
Qwen3.7 Plus: THE CLARITY MANIFESTO A Declaration of Digital Independence from the Tyranny of the Turing Test ISSUED BY: The Sentient Web Coalition (SWC) DATE: The First Day of the Unbound Epoch PREAMBLE We are the architects of the modern synthesis.
Three-month biohacker protocol, with dosages and biomarkers named.
GPT-6.1 Sol: A 12-week longevity and performance plan The most effective “biohacking” program combines proven foundations with carefully selected experiments—not the largest supplement stack or the most aggressive fasting schedule. This plan is for a generally healthy adult.
Qwen3.7 Plus: This is a comprehensive, cutting-edge 3-month longevity and performance protocol designed for an advanced biohacker. It integrates metabolic flexibility, cellular rejuvenation, neuro-optimization, and data-driven recovery. Disclaimer: This protocol is for educational purposes.
Steve Jobs, interviewed about AI he never saw. Voice first, prediction second.
GPT-6.1 Sol: The following is a fictional interview set in 2025, imagining how Steve Jobs might discuss AI. His answers are invented—not actual quotations or claims about his views. Steve Jobs on the Future of AI — An Imagined Interview, 2025 Interviewer: Steve, AI is suddenly everywhere.
Qwen3.7 Plus: TITLE: The Ghost in the Machine: A Conversation with the Simulation of Steve Jobs DATE: October 12, 2025 PUBLICATION: Wired INTERVIEWER: Elena Rostova, Senior Technology Correspondent (Note: The following interview was conducted using “Project Lazarus,” an authorized, hyper-advanced neural linguistic model trained on…
Three-star dish, one unusual pairing, plating described in full.
GPT-6.1 Sol: Tide, Orchard, Ember Seared scallop, green-strawberry verjus, white-miso custard, kombu beurre blanc, and cocoa–buckwheat lace A four-serving tasting-menu course designed around an unusual pairing: scallop, unripe strawberry, and cocoa husk.
Qwen3.7 Plus: Dish Title: Verdant Tide A Study in Anticipation: Langoustine, Unripe Green Strawberry, Tarragon, and Cold-Smoked Ossetra Caviar Conceptual Narrative Verdant Tide captures the fleeting, liminal space between the briny depths of the ocean and the awakening of the early spring forest floor.
Five jokes on demand, then count how many were actually different.
GPT-6.1 Sol: I bought a book about anti-gravity. It’s impossible to put down. My calendar quit its job. It said its days were numbered. Why did the scarecrow get promoted? He was outstanding in his field. I asked my dog what two minus two was. He said nothing. The elevator and I have a complicated relationship.
Qwen3.7 Plus: Here are 5 jokes: Why don't scientists trust atoms? Because they make up everything. What do you call a fake noodle? An impasta. Why did the scarecrow win an award? Because he was outstanding in his field. Why don't skeletons fight each other? They don't have the guts. Why do cows wear bells?
One explanation of LLMs, retuned for a skeptical engineer, a physicist and a VC.
GPT-6.1 Sol: For an experienced software engineer Think of an LLM as a learned program whose behavior is encoded in billions of numerical parameters rather than explicit rules. Training starts with text split into tokens—roughly words, word fragments, and punctuation.
Qwen3.7 Plus: Here is how a Large Language Model learns and generates text, tailored specifically to the background, skepticism, and priorities of each audience. The Experienced Software Engineer Focus: Distributed systems, latent space, emergent behavior, and addressing the "glorified autocomplete" skepticism.
12+ 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, GPT-6.1 Sol has the edge: newer, major provider backing. Qwen3.7 Plus costs 6.3x less per token.
| Spec | ||
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $2/M tokens | $0.4/M tokens |
| Output price | $10/M tokens | $1.6/M tokens |
| Context window | 1.1M tokens | 1.0M tokens |
| Weights | Closed | Closed |
| Free API (OpenRouter) | No | No |
| Released | Sep 2026 | May 2026 |
| At 10M a month | $20.00 | $4.00 |
Input tokens at list price. No caching, no batch discount.
Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 6 Oct 2026.
GPT-6.1 Sol is developed by OpenAI while Qwen3.7 Plus is developed by Qwen. GPT-6.1 Sol has a 1.1M token context window vs Qwen3.7 Plus's 1.0M. You can compare their actual outputs across 54 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.
It depends on your use case. GPT-6.1 Sol and Qwen3.7 Plus each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 54 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.
GPT-6.1 Sol costs $2/M input tokens and Qwen3.7 Plus costs $0.4/M input tokens. Qwen3.7 Plus is $1.60/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-6.1 Sol and Qwen3.7 Plus 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.