ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Gemini 2.5 Pro vs GPT-4.1 vs Qwen3 32B

Gemini 2.5 Pro comes out ahead, 63 to 53 and 51 on our weighted score, though Qwen3 32B is 2.8× cheaper per token.

  1. Our pick

    Google

    Gemini 2.5 Pro

    Released Jun 17, 2025

    63/100
    • ECI145.3
    • Price$1.25 / $10.00
    • Context1.05M
    Full specs Remove Gemini 2.5 Pro

  2. OpenAI

    GPT-4.1

    Released Apr 14, 2025

    53/100
    • ECI136.8
    • Price$2.00 / $8.00
    • Context1.05M
    Full specs Remove GPT-4.1

  3. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3 32B

    Released Apr 29, 2025

    51/100
    • ECI138.5
    • Price$0.70 / $2.80
    • Context131K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3 32B
01 — Verdict

Gemini 2.5 Pro is our pick

Gemini 2.5 Pro is the better all-round choice, scoring 63/100 against GPT-4.1 (53) and Qwen3 32B (51). It leads on capability and inputs & features. Qwen3 32B wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityGemini 2.5 ProCapabilities Index (ECI): Gemini 2.5 Pro 145.3 · Qwen3 32B 138.5 · GPT-4.1 136.8
  • Lowest priceQwen3 32BQwen3 32B $1.23 · Gemini 2.5 Pro $3.44 · GPT-4.1 $3.50 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextGemini 2.5 Pro and GPT-4.1Gemini 2.5 Pro 1,048,576 · GPT-4.1 1,047,576 · Qwen3 32B 131,072 tokens
  • Widest inputsGemini 2.5 ProGemini 2.5 Pro: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video · GPT-4.1: Text, Images, PDFs · Qwen3 32B: Text
  • Self-hostingQwen3 32BPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightGemini 2.5 ProGPT-4.1Qwen3 32B
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%726164
Price25%242446
Inputs & features15%1007035
Context window10%616124
Overall100%63/10053/10051/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Gemini 2.5 Pro vs GPT-4.1 vs Qwen3 32B specifications side by side
SpecificationGemini 2.5 ProGoogleGPT-4.1OpenAIQwen3 32BAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)145.3 (best)136.8138.5
ECI rank#78 of 148 (best)#111 of 148#106 of 148
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions85.3% (best)66.9%65.7%
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics24.6% (best)6.0%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics84.7% (best)38.3%66.9%
SWE-bench VerifiedFixing real GitHub issues57.6% (best)48.5%—
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions—31.1%—
Price per million tokens
Input$1.25$2.00$0.70 (best)
Output$10.00$8.00$2.80 (best)
Cached input$0.125 (best)$0.50—
Blended (3:1)$3.44$3.50$1.23 (best)
Long-context rateOver 200K: $2.50 / $15.00Same rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Google APIOfficial OpenAI APIOfficial Alibaba API
Limits
Context window1,048,576 tokens (best)1,047,576 tokens131,072 tokens
Max output65,536 tokens (best)32,768 tokens16,384 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesYesYesNo
PDFsYesYesNo
AudioYesNoNo
VideoYesNoNo
ReasoningYesNoYes
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputYesYesNo
Availability
WeightsProprietaryProprietaryOpen
API model IDgemini-2.5-progpt-4.1qwen3-32b
API providers2225 (best)14
ReleasedJun 17, 2025Apr 14, 2025Apr 29, 2025
Knowledge cutoffJan 2025Apr 2024Apr 2025
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Gemini 2.5 Pro$32.50
  • GPT-4.1$36.00
  • Qwen3 32B$12.60
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Gemini 2.5 Pro, GPT-4.1 or Qwen3 32B?

Gemini 2.5 Pro is the better all-round choice, scoring 63/100 against GPT-4.1 (53) and Qwen3 32B (51). It leads on capability and inputs & features. Qwen3 32B wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Pro, GPT-4.1 or Qwen3 32B?

Qwen3 32B is cheaper at $0.70 input / $2.80 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). Gemini 2.5 Pro costs $1.25 input / $10.00 output per million tokens (official Google API price); GPT-4.1 costs $2.00 input / $8.00 output per million tokens (official OpenAI API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $1.23 per million tokens for Qwen3 32B versus $3.44 for Gemini 2.5 Pro (2.8× as much) and $3.50 for GPT-4.1 (2.9× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Gemini 2.5 Pro scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Gemini 2.5 Pro 145.3 (#78 of 148), Qwen3 32B 138.5 (#106 of 148) and GPT-4.1 136.8 (#111 of 148). Their confidence ranges do not overlap (143.6–146.9 vs 135.1–140.4), so the gap is a real one. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Gemini 2.5 Pro 85.3%, GPT-4.1 66.9%, Qwen3 32B 65.7%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Gemini 2.5 Pro 84.7%, Qwen3 32B 66.9%, GPT-4.1 38.3%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3 32B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Gemini 2.5 Pro leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 2.5 Pro and GPT-4.1 have the largest context windows (1,048,576 and 1,047,576 tokens), against 131,072 for Qwen3 32B. Maximum output per response: Gemini 2.5 Pro up to 65,536, GPT-4.1 up to 32,768, Qwen3 32B up to 16,384 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Gemini 2.5 Pro accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video; GPT-4.1 accepts text, images and PDFs; Qwen3 32B accepts text. Gemini 2.5 Pro handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Qwen3 32B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Gemini 2.5 Pro and GPT-4.1 is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Gemini 2.5 Pro is the newest, released Jun 17, 2025. Qwen3 32B came out Apr 29, 2025; GPT-4.1 came out Apr 14, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Gemini 2.5 Pro Jan 2025, GPT-4.1 Apr 2024, Qwen3 32B Apr 2025.

How do you decide the winner?

Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons