GPT-5.4 Mini vs Qwen3.5 122B A10B
Compare GPT-5.4 Mini and Qwen3.5 122B A10B side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Open Prompt, Image Captioning, and OCR.
Compare GPT-5.4 Mini vs Qwen3.5 122B A10B live
Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.
Extract and compare text from images across multiple models.
Upload an image
Drag and drop an image here, or click to browse
Models in this comparison
GPT-5.4 Mini vs Qwen3.5 122B A10B: Overview
GPT-5.4 mini is a fast, cost-efficient model developed by OpenAI and released on March 17, 2026, optimized for high-throughput workloads and subagent orchestration. It supports text and image inputs within a 400,000-token context window, making it ideal for processing extensive visual datasets and large codebases in a single request. Designed for low-latency production environments, the model integrates with key API features including function calling, web search, and tool-based computer use, allowing it to assist in automated workflows that require navigating digital interfaces.
Compared to the previous GPT-5 mini, this version runs more than twice as fast while approaching the performance levels of the flagship GPT-5.4 on reasoning and coding benchmarks. While the larger GPT-5.4 introduces native, state-of-the-art computer-use capabilities, GPT-5.4 mini provides a scalable alternative for interpreting screenshots and reasoning over dense UI layouts. For vision tasks on Playground, it excels at extracting structured information from visual documents and assisting in agentic tasks that involve real-time interpretation of software interfaces alongside text.
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B is a high-capacity multimodal Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) model developed by Alibaba’s Qwen team as part of the Qwen3.5 model family. The architecture contains 122 billion total parameters while activating roughly 10 billion per token through sparse expert routing, allowing the model to balance large-scale reasoning ability with relatively efficient inference compared to dense models of similar size.
The model is designed to process both text and visual inputs within a unified multimodal framework, enabling tasks that require reasoning across images, documents, charts, and natural language. This makes it suitable for applications such as document understanding, diagram interpretation, and complex visual question answering.
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B supports a native context window of approximately 256,000 tokens, which can be extended further through techniques such as YaRN scaling to support very long-context workloads. Released under the Apache 2.0 license, it builds on earlier Qwen multimodal systems and provides developers with an open-weight model capable of handling demanding multimodal reasoning and analysis tasks.
GPT-5.4 Mini vs Qwen3.5 122B A10B Comparison Table
| Property | GPT-5.4 Mini | Qwen3.5 122B A10B |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | OpenAI | Qwen |
| Category | closed | open |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Mar 2026 | Feb 2026 |
| Context Window | 400K | 256K |
| Parameters | 122B | |
| License | Proprietary | Apache 2.0 |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $0.750 | $0.260 |
| Output $/1M | $4.50 | $2.08 |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | Demo |
| Object Detection | Demo | |
| OCR | Demo | Demo |
| Vision Language | ||
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | Demo |
| Classification | Demo | |
| Model Features | ||
| LLMs with Vision Capabilities | ||
| Multimodal Vision | ||
| Foundation Vision | ||
Vision Evalspass/fail results · 67 prompts Score key:≥75%40–74%<40% | ||
| Overall Score | 74.63% | 76.12% |
| Avg Response Time | 7.87s | 1.77s |
| Median input tokensincl. image tokens | 1.2K | |
| Median output tokens | 7 | |
| Est. cost / taskon this benchmark | $0.0003 | |
| Defect Detection | 80%(12/15) | 86.7%(13/15) |
| Document Understanding | 88.9%(8/9) | 77.8%(7/9) |
| Object Counting | 30%(3/10) | 40%(4/10) |
| Object Understanding | 85.7%(12/14) | 92.9%(13/14) |
| Spatial Understanding | 78.9%(15/19) | 73.7%(14/19) |
Output tokens (incl. reasoning) and est. cost / task are measured on this benchmark from a single low-temperature run, and shown only for models whose run covered at least 90% of prompts. Methodology