GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) vs Qwen3.7 Max
Which is better for the money: GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) by OpenAI or Qwen3.7 Max by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-24.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Qwen3.7 Max scores 8.8 points higher (29.5 vs 20.7) but costs 6.9× as much to run the benchmark ($2277 vs $331; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Qwen3.7 Max when you need intelligence above 20.7, and GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) when 20.7 is enough.
| Metric | GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) | Qwen3.7 Max | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 20.7 | 29.5 | +42.5% Qwen3.7 Max is 42.5% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $331.24 | $2,277.12 | +587.5% Qwen3.7 Max is 6.9× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 53.29s | 16.61s | −68.8% Qwen3.7 Max is 68.8% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.20 / $1.25 | $2.50 / $7.50 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Qwen3.7 Max vs GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh): 42.5% more intelligence, 587.5% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 68.8% 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.
- Qwen3.7 Max is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) scores 53.60 for $2172.
GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh)Qwen3.7 MaxToday's Pareto 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/qwen3-7-max · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-5-4-nano/qwen3-7-max?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill