ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

GPT OSS 120B vs Qwen3.5 Flash

Qwen3.5 Flash comes out ahead, 73 to 58 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. OpenAI

    GPT OSS 120B

    Released Aug 5, 2025

    58/100
    • ECI139.8
    • Price$0.15 / $0.60
    • Context131K
    Full specs Remove GPT OSS 120B
  2. Our pick

    Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.5 Flash

    Released Feb 23, 2026

    73/100
    • ECI143.6
    • Price$0.10 / $0.40
    • Context1M
    Full specs Remove Qwen3.5 Flash

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Qwen3.5 Flash is our pick

Qwen3.5 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 73/100 against GPT OSS 120B (58). It leads on capability, price, inputs & features and context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityQwen3.5 FlashCapabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3.5 Flash 143.6 · GPT OSS 120B 139.8
  • Lowest priceQwen3.5 FlashQwen3.5 Flash $0.175 · GPT OSS 120B $0.263 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextQwen3.5 FlashQwen3.5 Flash 1,000,000 · GPT OSS 120B 131,072 tokens
  • Widest inputsQwen3.5 FlashGPT OSS 120B: Text · Qwen3.5 Flash: Text, Images, Video
  • Self-hostingGPT OSS 120BPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightGPT OSS 120BQwen3.5 Flash
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%6469
Price25%7482
Inputs & features15%3580
Context window10%2560
Overall100%58/10073/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

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

GPT OSS 120B vs Qwen3.5 Flash specifications side by side
SpecificationGPT OSS 120BOpenAIQwen3.5 FlashAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)139.8143.6 (best)
ECI rank#114 of 165#95 of 165 (best)
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions75.8%82.3% (best)
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics—18.3%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics88.9% (best)84.4%
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions—20.3%
Price per million tokens
Input$0.15$0.10 (best)
Output$0.60$0.40 (best)
Cached input—$0.01
Blended (3:1)$0.263$0.175 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 65 providersOfficial Alibaba API
Limits
Context window131,072 tokens1,000,000 tokens (best)
Max output32,768 tokens65,536 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesNoYes
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoNo
VideoNoYes
ReasoningYesYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoYes
Availability
WeightsOpenProprietary
API model ID—qwen3.5-flash
API providers67 (best)9
ReleasedAug 5, 2025Feb 23, 2026
Knowledge cutoffJun 2024—
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.

  • GPT OSS 120B$2.70
  • Qwen3.5 Flash$1.80
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: GPT OSS 120B or Qwen3.5 Flash?

Qwen3.5 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 73/100 against GPT OSS 120B (58). It leads on capability, price, inputs & features and context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, GPT OSS 120B or Qwen3.5 Flash?

Qwen3.5 Flash is cheaper at $0.10 input / $0.40 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). GPT OSS 120B costs $0.15 input / $0.60 output per million tokens (median across 65 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.175 per million tokens for Qwen3.5 Flash versus $0.263 for GPT OSS 120B (1.5× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Qwen3.5 Flash scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3.5 Flash 143.6 (#95 of 165) and GPT OSS 120B 139.8 (#114 of 165). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (141.4–145.0 vs 135.6–142.2), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Qwen3.5 Flash 82.3%, GPT OSS 120B 75.8%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — GPT OSS 120B 88.9%, Qwen3.5 Flash 84.4%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for GPT OSS 120B and Qwen3.5 Flash yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Qwen3.5 Flash leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.5 Flash has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 131,072 for GPT OSS 120B. Maximum output per response: GPT OSS 120B up to 32,768, Qwen3.5 Flash up to 65,536 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

GPT OSS 120B accepts text; Qwen3.5 Flash accepts text, images and video. Qwen3.5 Flash handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

GPT OSS 120B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Qwen3.5 Flash is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Qwen3.5 Flash is the newest, released Feb 23, 2026. GPT OSS 120B came out Aug 5, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: GPT OSS 120B Jun 2024.

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 Nov 2, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons