Navigate
AI BENCHY
Advertise here

OpenAI: GPT-5.6 Terra vs Qwen: Qwen3.5-Flash

Qwen3.5-Flash (medium) leads on average score with 6.2 vs 6.0. Qwen3.5-Flash (medium) has the lower benchmark cost at $0.139 vs $0.349. GPT-5.6 Terra is faster at 1.65s vs 84.82s, with pass rates of 42.4% vs 69.7%.

Recommended modelGPT-5.6 TerraIts score stays close to the best score here (6.0 vs 6.2), while responding about 51.4x faster than Qwen3.5-Flash (medium).

Last updated at: 2026-07-18

Metric GPT-5.6 Terra GPT-5.6 Terra none Release: 2026-07-09 Qwen3.5-Flash Qwen3.5-Flash medium Release: 2026-02-24
Score 6.0 6.2
Rank #128 #110
Reliability 10.0 10.0
Consistency 8.9 7.8
Tests Correct
Attempt pass rate 42.4% 69.7%
Flaky tests 3 6
Total Runs 66 66
Cost per result 4.359 1.361
Total Cost $0.349 $0.139
Input Price $2.500 / 1M $0.065 / 1M
Output Price $15.000 / 1M $0.260 / 1M
Total Input Tokens 102,259 118,499
Output Tokens 6,203 12,284
Reasoning Tokens 0 490,610
Response Time (avg) 1.65s 84.82s
Response Time (max) 10.07s 515.38s
Response Time (total) 36.28s 1781.22s

Hamster playing table tennis

Prompt: Create a detailed SVG illustration of a hamster playing table tennis.

#128 GPT-5.6 Terra

none
Cost
$0.030
Time
14.7s
Tokens
2,082 tok

#110 Qwen3.5-Flash

medium
Cost
$0.002
Time
25.8s
Tokens
4,294 tok

Top Models by Score

Score vs Total Cost

Response Time (avg)

Score vs Response Time (avg)

Total Output Tokens

Score vs Total Output Tokens

Category Breakdown

Coding Score Consistency Attempt pass rate Flaky tests Tests Correct Response Time (avg) Input Tokens Output Tokens Reasoning Tokens
GPT-5.6 Terra 5.5 10.0 33.3% 0 1.00s 7,302 336 0
Qwen3.5-Flash 3.7 7.2 22.2% 1 58.87s 6,685 302 90,081

Quick Compare

Switch Comparison Pair