GPT-5 mini (High) vs Qwen3.6 27B (Reasoning)
Which is better for the money: GPT-5 mini (High) by OpenAI or Qwen3.6 27B (Reasoning) by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Qwen3.6 27B (Reasoning) scores 4.6 points higher (21.4 vs 16.8) but costs 6.1× as much to run the benchmark ($1145 vs $189; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Qwen3.6 27B (Reasoning) when you need intelligence above 16.8, and GPT-5 mini (High) when 16.8 is enough.
| Metric | GPT-5 mini (High) | Qwen3.6 27B (Reasoning) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 16.8 | 21.4 | +27.4% Qwen3.6 27B (Reasonin… is 27.4% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $188.66 | $1,145.36 | +507.1% Qwen3.6 27B (Reasonin… is 6.1× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 64.18s | 111.39s | +73.6% Qwen3.6 27B (Reasonin… is 73.6% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.25 / $2.00 | $0.60 / $3.60 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image, Video |
Qwen3.6 27B (Reasoning) vs GPT-5 mini (High): 27.4% more intelligence, 507.1% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 73.6% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-5 mini (High) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Haiku 5.5 (Xhigh) scores 41.20 for $158.
- 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 mini (High)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-mini/qwen3-6-27b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-5-mini/qwen3-6-27b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill