GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) vs Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning)
Which is better for the money: GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) by OpenAI or Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning) by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) scores 9.5 points higher (20.7 vs 11.2) but costs 1.0× as much to run the benchmark ($331 vs $329; both mid-range class). Pick GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning).
| Metric | GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) | Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 20.7 | 11.2 | −45.9% Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning) is 45.9% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $331.24 | $328.86 | −0.7% Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning) is 0.7% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 93.46s | 43.82s | −53.1% Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning) is 53.1% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.20 / $1.25 | $0.14 / $0.20 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image, Video |
Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning) vs GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh): 45.9% less intelligence, 0.7% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 53.1% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
- Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh)Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning)Today's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/gpt-5-4-nano/qwen3-5-9b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-5-4-nano/qwen3-5-9b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill