GPT-5 (high) vs Qwen3 Coder Next
Which is better for the money: GPT-5 (high) by OpenAI or Qwen3 Coder Next by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-09-01.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
GPT-5 (high) scores 14.0 points higher (35.3 vs 21.3) but costs 3.1× as much to run the benchmark ($778 vs $250; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick GPT-5 (high) when you need intelligence above 21.3, and Qwen3 Coder Next when 21.3 is enough.
| Metric | GPT-5 (high) | Qwen3 Coder Next | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 35.3 | 21.3 | −39.7% Qwen3 Coder Next is 39.7% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $778.33 | $250.18 | −67.9% Qwen3 Coder Next is 67.9% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 71.22s | 4.49s | −93.7% Qwen3 Coder Next is 93.7% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $1.25 / $10.0 | $0.35 / $1.20 | |
| Input modalities | Not reported | Not reported |
Qwen3 Coder Next vs GPT-5 (high): 39.7% less intelligence, 67.9% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 93.7% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-5 (high) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GLM-5.3-Flash scores 57.50 for $138.
- Qwen3 Coder Next is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GLM-5.3-Flash scores 57.50 for $138.
GPT-5 (high)Qwen3 Coder NextToday'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/qwen3-coder-next · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-5/qwen3-coder-next?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill