Compare / Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 vs GPT-4.1

Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 vs GPT-4.1

Which is cheaper, which is more capable, and which does better at each kind of work, from 17 results on 4 sources that measured both models.

AlibabaQwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 Released 25 Jul 2025 · $0.30 in · $3.00 out
OpenAIGPT-4.1 Released 14 Apr 2025 · $2.00 in · $8.00 out
Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 wins 73 too close to callGPT-4.1 wins 7

Of the 17 results both models have, the better value on each. Results whose reported ranges overlap are too close to call.

Results as of 9 October 2026 (catalogue release 2026-10-09-dd620e778ac5). See also Alibaba vs OpenAI, every model from both labs.

Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 or GPT-4.1? The short answer

They score about the same, so pick Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507: it costs 3.6 times less per token.

  • Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 is cheaper: $0.97 against $3.50 per million tokens, 3.6 times less.
  • They score about the same on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index (12.7 and 12.7).
  • Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 is newer: released 25 Jul 2025, against 14 Apr 2025 for GPT-4.1.
  • On third-party benchmarks, on the results both models have: Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 does better for reasoning and knowledge and sticking to the facts; GPT-4.1 for writing.

Head to head

12.7
Intelligence Index
12.7
$0.97
Price per million tokens, blendedlower is better
$3.50
131,072
Context window, tokens
1,047,576

Every fact side by side

Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507GPT-4.1
Price per million tokens$0.30 in · $3.00 out$2.00 in · $8.00 out
Blended (3 in : 1 out)$0.97$3.50
Cheapest host, blended$0.75 (Alibaba)$3.50 (Azure)
Intelligence Index12.712.7
Spring Prompt overall––
Output speed, tokens a second––
Context window131,072 tokens1,047,576 tokens
Released25 Jul 2025 (newer)14 Apr 2025
WeightsOpenClosed
Developer based inChinathe US

Prices are the developer's list price where we have read it, otherwise the typical host on OpenRouter; see every model's price. Intelligence and speed from Artificial Analysis.

Which is better for what

Each model's rank among the models on sale today, for each kind of work, from our own benchmarks and licensed sources. Further right is better; the better rank is in green.

Agents and tool useMulti-step tasks with tools: support desks, coding agents, function calls 138 of 164 41 of 164
Reasoning and knowledgeHard questions across science, maths and general knowledge 117 of 198 151 of 198
WritingWhat people prefer in blind comparisons, and judged writing quality 122 of 188 56 of 188
Sticking to the factsSummarising without inventing things, and factual answers 92 of 152 93 of 152

Every shared result

Each model's best result on every measure both have, grouped by benchmark, with the setting that produced it. Under each measure, every model that benchmark has measured is a grey tick, best to the right, so you can see where the two sit in the field. The headline measures of each benchmark come first; the rest are under "Show all". Green marks the better value; where a source reports ranges that overlap, neither is marked.

MeasureQwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507GPT-4.1
Arena (formerly LMArena) reported by Arena (formerly LMArena) · 3 results
Overall · TextArena rating, higher is better 139 · 119 of 387 measured 1,400 1,415
Business, management and finance · TextArena rating, higher is better 133 · 115 of 380 measured 1,404 1,415
Creative writing · TextArena rating, higher is better 133 · 90 of 385 measured 1,371 1,403
Artificial Analysis reported by Artificial Analysis · 3 results
Artificial Analysis Intelligence Indexindex score, higher is better 147 · 147 of 243 measured 12.7 12.7
GPQA Diamond% of questions, higher is better 114 · 169 of 231 measured 79.0% 66.6%
Humanity's Last Exam% of questions, higher is better 122 · 213 of 242 measured 15.9% 4.2%
SimpleQA Verified (Epoch AI) reported by SimpleQA Verified (Epoch AI) · 1 result
Correct answers% of questions, higher is better 44 · 57 of 76 measured 40.4% 31.1%
UGI Leaderboard reported by UGI Leaderboard · 3 results
Writing score · UGIscore out of 100, higher is better 139 · 19 of 230 measured 32.4 67.5
Requested-length error · UGI% off the requested word count, lower is better 166 · 17 of 230 measured 30.0% 6.0%
Style adherence · UGIscore from 0 to 1, higher is better 194 · 159 of 230 measured 0.31 0.33
Show all 17 results (7 more)
MeasureQwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507GPT-4.1
Arena (formerly LMArena) reported by Arena (formerly LMArena) · 3 results
Expert prompts · TextArena rating, higher is better 85 · 147 of 338 measured 1,466 1,405
Instruction following · TextArena rating, higher is better 142 · 118 of 387 measured 1,385 1,403
Writing, literature and language · TextArena rating, higher is better 139 · 98 of 386 measured 1,377 1,405
Artificial Analysis reported by Artificial Analysis · 4 results
IFBench% of instructions, higher is better 101 · 122 of 195 measured 51.2% 43.0%
Long-context reasoning (AA-LCR)% of questions, higher is better 99 · 118 of 233 measured 72.0% 68.3%
Terminal-Bench Hard% of tasks, higher is better 116 · 116 of 190 measured 13.6% 13.6%
τ²-bench telecom% of tasks, higher is better 101 · 105 of 193 measured 53.2% 47.1%

Quick answers

Is Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 better than GPT-4.1?

They score about the same, so pick Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507: it costs 3.6 times less per token.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 or GPT-4.1?

Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 is cheaper: $0.97 against $3.50 per million tokens, 3.6 times less.

Which is better for agents and tool use, Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 or GPT-4.1?

GPT-4.1 ranks 41 of 164 models on sale for multi-step tasks with tools: support desks, coding agents, function calls, against 138 for Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507.

Which is better for reasoning and knowledge, Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 or GPT-4.1?

Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 ranks 117 of 198 models on sale for hard questions across science, maths and general knowledge, against 151 for GPT-4.1.

Which is better for writing, Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 or GPT-4.1?

GPT-4.1 ranks 56 of 188 models on sale for what people prefer in blind comparisons, and judged writing quality, against 122 for Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507.

Which is better for sticking to the facts, Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 or GPT-4.1?

Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 ranks 92 of 152 models on sale for summarising without inventing things, and factual answers, against 93 for GPT-4.1.

Which has the bigger context window, Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 or GPT-4.1?

GPT-4.1: 1,047,576 tokens, against 131,072 for Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507.

Run Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 and GPT-4.1 on your own prompt

Benchmarks aren't your data. Try both side by side in the playground, with the cost of every answer.

Try the playgroundTalk to us