GPT-4.1 vs Qwen3.7 Flash

At a Glance

Compare
GPT-4.1OpenAI
Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency
IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v2.5#44 of 463.7 score · 2/3 sources · provisional · missing LiveBench · full-core range 2.5–35.8UnrankedNot in the 46-model eligible cohort
Pricing and Limits
Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$1.00Openrouter · Sep 3, 2026$0.030Openrouter · Sep 22, 2026
Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$4.00Openrouter · Sep 3, 2026$0.13Openrouter · Sep 22, 2026
Context windowMaximum documented tokens1,048K1,000K
Model facts checkedAug 29, 2026View model evidence →Sep 3, 2026View model evidence →

Token prices are the lowest available sourced USD rates; input and output may use different providers. Cost ranking estimates output spend on LiveBench, not a full request bill. Ranking methodology →

Available Benchmarks

All benchmark results →
No Protocol-Matched Benchmark Yet.Results appear here only when both models share the same benchmark version, metric, evaluation protocol, and evidence class.

Side-by-Side Facts

FieldGPT-4.1Qwen3.7 Flash
DeveloperOpenAIQwen
FamilyGpt 4 1Qwen3 7
ModelGPT-4.1Qwen3.7 Flash
VersionGPT-4.1Qwen3.7 Flash
Lifecycleactiveactive
ReleasedUnknown2026-07-15
Knowledge cutoff2024-06-01Unknown
Input modalitiesText, ImageText, Image, Video
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window1,048K1,000K
Total parametersUnknownUnknown
Active parametersUnknownUnknown
LicenseUnknownUnknown
Open weightsNoNo
API availableYesYes
Self-hostableNoNo
Provider accessOpenai (Standard), Openrouter (Standard)Alibaba Cloud Model Studio (Standard), Openrouter (Standard)
Capabilitieschat, generation, toolsagents, chat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools, vision

GPT-4.1 Capabilities

chatgenerationtools
Serving providers2
Canonical IDopenai/gpt-4.1

Qwen3.7 Flash Capabilities

agentschatgenerationreasoningstructured outputstoolsvision
Serving providers2
Canonical IDqwen/qwen3.7-flash

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

GPT-4.1 vs Qwen3.7 Flash FAQs

Is GPT-4.1 or Qwen3.7 Flash better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both GPT-4.1 and Qwen3.7 Flash, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, GPT-4.1 or Qwen3.7 Flash?+

GPT-4.1 is $1.00 and Qwen3.7 Flash is $0.030 per million tokens, so Qwen3.7 Flash is cheaper on this metric. GPT-4.1 is $4.00 and Qwen3.7 Flash is $0.13 per million tokens, so Qwen3.7 Flash is cheaper on this metric.

Which has a larger context window, GPT-4.1 or Qwen3.7 Flash?+

GPT-4.1 has the larger sourced context window. GPT-4.1 supports 1,048K and Qwen3.7 Flash supports 1,000K.

Which performs better in benchmarks, GPT-4.1 or Qwen3.7 Flash?+

There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.

Can GPT-4.1 or Qwen3.7 Flash be self-hosted?+

Both models have the same recorded self-hosting status: unsupported. GPT-4.1 is not marked open weight; Qwen3.7 Flash is not marked open weight.

Can GPT-4.1 and Qwen3.7 Flash understand images?+

GPT-4.1 is documented with image input; Qwen3.7 Flash is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.

Which can generate longer answers, GPT-4.1 or Qwen3.7 Flash?+

Qwen3.7 Flash has the larger sourced maximum output: GPT-4.1 supports 33K and Qwen3.7 Flash supports 66K output tokens.

Do GPT-4.1 and Qwen3.7 Flash support reasoning and tool use?+

GPT-4.1: tool calling and image input. Qwen3.7 Flash: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, GPT-4.1 or Qwen3.7 Flash?+

GPT-4.1 has 2 sourced provider routes; Qwen3.7 Flash has 2, a tie.

Which offers better value, GPT-4.1 or Qwen3.7 Flash?+

There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.

Send Feedback