GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) vs Qwen3.6 27B (Reasoning)
Which is better for the money: GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) by OpenAI or Qwen3.6 27B (Reasoning) by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-27.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Qwen3.6 27B (Reasoning) scores 0.7 points higher (21.4 vs 20.7) but costs 3.5× as much to run the benchmark ($1145 vs $331; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Qwen3.6 27B (Reasoning) when you need intelligence above 20.7, and GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) when 20.7 is enough.
| Metric | GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) | Qwen3.6 27B (Reasoning) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 20.7 | 21.4 | +3.4% Qwen3.6 27B (Reasonin… is 3.4% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $331.24 | $1,145.36 | +245.8% Qwen3.6 27B (Reasonin… is 3.5× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 105.70s | 110.84s | +4.9% Qwen3.6 27B (Reasonin… is 4.9% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.20 / $1.25 | $0.60 / $3.60 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image, Video |
Qwen3.6 27B (Reasoning) vs GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh): 3.4% more intelligence, 245.8% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 4.9% slower 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.
- Qwen3.6 27B (Reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh)Qwen3.6 27B (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/qwen3-6-27b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-5-4-nano/qwen3-6-27b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill