ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

Qwen3.5 Flash vs GPT OSS 120B

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

  1. 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

  2. OpenAI

    GPT OSS 120B

    Released Aug 5, 2025

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

  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 FlashQwen3.5 Flash: Text, Images, Video · GPT OSS 120B: Text
  • Self-hostingGPT OSS 120BPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightQwen3.5 FlashGPT OSS 120B
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%6964
Price25%8274
Inputs & features15%8035
Context window10%6025
Overall100%73/10058/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

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

Qwen3.5 Flash vs GPT OSS 120B specifications side by side
SpecificationQwen3.5 FlashAlibaba (Qwen)GPT OSS 120BOpenAI
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)143.6 (best)139.8
ECI rank#95 of 165 (best)#114 of 165
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions82.3% (best)75.8%
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics18.3%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics84.4%88.9% (best)
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions20.3%—
Price per million tokens
Input$0.10 (best)$0.15
Output$0.40 (best)$0.60
Cached input$0.01—
Blended (3:1)$0.175 (best)$0.263
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Alibaba APIMedian of 65 providers
Limits
Context window1,000,000 tokens (best)131,072 tokens
Max output65,536 tokens (best)32,768 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesNo
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoNo
VideoYesNo
ReasoningYesYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputYesNo
Availability
WeightsProprietaryOpen
API model IDqwen3.5-flash—
API providers967 (best)
ReleasedFeb 23, 2026Aug 5, 2025
Knowledge cutoff—Jun 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.

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

Which should you choose?

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

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, Qwen3.5 Flash or GPT OSS 120B?

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 Qwen3.5 Flash and GPT OSS 120B 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: Qwen3.5 Flash up to 65,536, GPT OSS 120B up to 32,768 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Qwen3.5 Flash accepts text, images and video; GPT OSS 120B accepts text. 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