Navigate
AI BENCHY
Advertise here

GPT-5 Nano (medium) vs Qwen3.7 Flash

The average score is effectively tied at 6.1 vs 6.1. Qwen3.7 Flash has the lower benchmark cost at $0.019 vs $0.114. Qwen3.7 Flash is faster at 10.06s vs 54.87s, with pass rates of 56.1% vs 36.4%.

Last updated at: 2026-07-28

Rank
#143
Total Output Tokens
273,098
Response Time (avg)
54.87s
Total Cost
$0.114
Rank
#136
Total Output Tokens
90,507
Response Time (avg)
10.06s
Total Cost
$0.019
Recommended model Qwen3.7 Flash

It has the best score here (6.1), while costing about 6.2x less than GPT-5 Nano (medium).

Detailed comparison

Metric GPT-5 Nano GPT-5 Nano medium Release: 2025-08-07 Qwen3.7 Flash Qwen3.7 Flash none Release: 2026-07-28
Score 6.1 6.1
Rank #143 #136
Reliability 10.0 10.0
Consistency 7.0 9.2
Tests Correct
Attempt pass rate 56.1% 36.4%
Flaky tests 8 2
Total Runs 66 66
Cost per result 1.267 0.262
Total Cost $0.114 $0.019
Input Price $0.050 / 1M $0.030 / 1M
Output Price $0.400 / 1M $0.130 / 1M
Total Input Tokens 94,935 218,731
Output Tokens 12,042 90,507
Reasoning Tokens 261,056 0
Response Time (avg) 54.87s 10.06s
Response Time (max) 227.89s 186.24s
Response Time (total) 822.99s 221.34s

Model generation showcase

Hamster playing table tennis

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

#143 GPT-5 Nano

medium
Cost
$0.006
Time
108.5s
Tokens
13,209 tok

#136 Qwen3.7 Flash

none
Cost
$0.001
Time
34.0s
Tokens
4,814 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 Nano 7.0 7.7 55.6% 1 41.62s 7,305 740 41,152
Qwen3.7 Flash 5.5 10.0 33.3% 0 1.55s 7,911 855 0

Quick Compare

Switch Comparison Pair