Skip to content
ModelCap

Head-to-head comparison

GPT-5.4 Nano vs Qwen3.8 Flash

GPT-5.4 Nano (OpenAI) and Qwen3.8 Flash (Qwen) compared on the ModelCap Index, API price, context window, provider availability, weight access and every public benchmark board they share. Figures are the same ones shown on the live rankings; nothing here is a hidden score.

Snapshot as of 9 September 2026

As of 9 September 2026, Qwen3.8 Flash holds the stronger ModelCap Index position (#69 vs #72); Qwen3.8 Flash is 2.7× cheaper per output token ($0.47/1M vs $1.25/1M); and Qwen3.8 Flash offers the longer context window (1M vs 400K tokens).

Which should you choose?

Choose GPT-5.4 Nano if…

  • ModelCap publishes no field on which GPT-5.4 Nano leads Qwen3.8 Flash for this pair.

Choose Qwen3.8 Flash if…

  • you want the stronger overall ModelCap Index position — #69 against #72 (52.8 vs 50.5 points).
  • API cost matters — $0.47/1M output tokens against $1.25/1M, about 2.7× cheaper.
  • your workload is prompt-heavy — input tokens cost $0.15/1M against $0.20/1M.
  • you need the longer context window — 1M tokens against 400K.
  • AA Terminal-Bench 2.1 is your yardstick — 86.1% against 60.7%.
  • AA Humanity's Last Exam is your yardstick — 38.0% against 28.3%.
  • you want the more recently listed model — Qwen3.8 Flash was listed 26 August 2026, GPT-5.4 Nano 17 March 2026.

GPT-5.4 Nano vs Qwen3.8 Flash: specs, pricing and context

Specification comparison of GPT-5.4 Nano and Qwen3.8 Flash
FieldGPT-5.4 NanoOpenAIQwen3.8 FlashQwen
ModelCap Index position#72#69
Index score50.552.8
EvidenceMeasuredEstimated
Input price / 1M tokens$0.20$0.15
Output price / 1M tokens$1.25$0.47
Context window400K tokens1M tokens
Max output tokens128K131K
API providers listed22
Weight accessAPI onlyRestricted license
Input modalitiesFile, Image, TextText, Image, Video
First listed17 March 202626 August 2026
PublisherOpenAIQwen

Evidence: 4 public benchmark observations across 4 boards · publisher-corpus-prior over 182 held-out anchors (19%); measured predecessor qwen/qwen3.5-flash-02-23 less the succession penalty (65%); launch card against 4 resolved peers on 9 rows (16%); exceeds every named peer on 7 of 9 rows; optimism haircut 0 from cross-lab-probe; shrunk 0.7 toward the measured corpus. Prices are the lowest listed API offer per million tokens observed on the OpenRouter catalogue.

Benchmark scores: GPT-5.4 Nano vs Qwen3.8 Flash

Public benchmark boards where GPT-5.4 Nano or Qwen3.8 Flash has a published result
BoardGPT-5.4 NanoQwen3.8 FlashLeads
Arena codingArena (LMArena)14601454–1466HighOnly one result
ARC-AGI-2ARC Prize Foundation5.7%X-HighOnly one result
AA Intelligence IndexArtificial Analysis21.2intelligence-index:v4.3:xhighOnly one result
AA Terminal-Bench 2.1Artificial Analysis60.7%terminal-bench:2.1:terminus-2:e2b:pass-at-1:3-repeats:source-model="GPT-5.4 nano (xhigh)":reasoning=true86.1%terminal-bench:2.1:terminus-2:e2b:pass-at-1:3-repeats:source-model="Qwen3.8-Flash-Next":reasoning=trueQwen3.8 Flash
AA τ²-Bench TelecomArtificial Analysis76.0%tau2:telecom:dual-control:pass-at-1:3-repeats:source-model="GPT-5.4 nano (xhigh)":reasoning=trueOnly one result
AA Humanity's Last ExamArtificial Analysis28.3%hle:may-2025:text-only-2158:no-tools:pass-at-1:source-model="GPT-5.4 nano (xhigh)":reasoning=true38.0%hle:may-2025:text-only-2158:no-tools:pass-at-1:source-model="Qwen3.8-Flash-Next":reasoning=trueQwen3.8 Flash

Scores are the sources' own published figures for each model's best evaluated configuration; ModelCap never re-runs a benchmark.

Want a different pairing? Open the interactive comparison tool to swap either model for any current ranked language model.

GPT-5.4 Nano vs Qwen3.8 Flash: common questions

Is GPT-5.4 Nano better than Qwen3.8 Flash?

Qwen3.8 Flash ranks higher on the ModelCap Index as of 9 September 2026: #69 against #72. That is a capability ranking built from public benchmark evidence with published uncertainty; whether it is "better" for you also depends on price, context and where you can run it. Their published uncertainty intervals overlap, so the rank difference alone does not establish a reliable capability advantage for your workload.

Is GPT-5.4 Nano cheaper than Qwen3.8 Flash?

Qwen3.8 Flash is cheaper on output tokens: $0.47/1M against $1.25/1M. Input tokens are $0.20/1M for GPT-5.4 Nano and $0.15/1M for Qwen3.8 Flash. Prices are the lowest listed API offer ModelCap observed, in USD per million tokens. For 1,000 requests with 2,000 input and 500 output tokens each (2M input + 0.5M output), the listed-rate estimate is $1.02 for GPT-5.4 Nano versus $0.53 for Qwen3.8 Flash. Qwen3.8 Flash costs 47.8% less in this scenario. This excludes caching, batch discounts, prompt-length tiers, tool charges and retries; verify the selected endpoint before budgeting.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5.4 Nano or Qwen3.8 Flash?

Qwen3.8 Flash has the larger context window: 1M tokens against 400K.

Which is better for coding, GPT-5.4 Nano or Qwen3.8 Flash?

AA Terminal-Bench 2.1: GPT-5.4 Nano 60.7%, Qwen3.8 Flash 86.1% — Qwen3.8 Flash leads.

Are GPT-5.4 Nano and Qwen3.8 Flash open-weight models?

GPT-5.4 Nano: API only. Qwen3.8 Flash: Restricted license. Open weights mean the checkpoint can be downloaded and self-hosted under its licence; API-only models are available solely through hosted endpoints.

Where can I run GPT-5.4 Nano and Qwen3.8 Flash?

ModelCap currently lists 2 API providers for GPT-5.4 Nano and 2 for Qwen3.8 Flash, from the OpenRouter catalogue snapshot the site serves; each model page lists the providers and their prices.

How current is this GPT-5.4 Nano vs Qwen3.8 Flash comparison?

Every figure comes from the sealed ModelCap dataset published 9 September 2026; the page re-renders within a minute of each data refresh, and the ModelCap Index positions are the same ones shown on the live rankings.

Explore further