pvakati-tech.ai

// head_to_head

GPT-5.4 vs Qwen3.8 Max Prime

Published LiveBench scores across all seven categories, live list pricing, context windows, and the measured cost of a point of capability — for both models, side by side.

OpenRouter + LiveBenchAll comparisonsFull leaderboard

GPT-5.4 and Qwen3.8 Max Prime are priced within ~10% of each other.

Qwen3.8 Max Prime does not have a published LiveBench run, so this comparison covers price, context and declared capabilities only. A missing score means "not evaluated", not "worse" — the right way to separate these two is an eval on your own workload.

openai

GPT-5.4

Blended / 1M
$5.63
Context
1.1M
Released
Mar 5, 2026
Overall score
78.0
reasoningtool callingimage inputfile inputprompt caching

qwen

Qwen3.8 Max Prime

Blended / 1M
$6.00
Context
1M
Released
Sep 23, 2026
Overall score
Not evaluated
reasoningtool callingimage inputvideo inputprompt caching

Specs and pricing

MetricGPT-5.4Qwen3.8 Max Prime
LiveBench overall

Mean of the seven LiveBench category scores, 0–100. Higher is better.

78.0—
Cost per point

Measured benchmark spend divided by overall score — dollars per point of capability.

$0.2198—
Blended price / 1M

3:1 input:output mix, the usual shape of production traffic.

$5.63$6.00
Input price / 1M$2.50win$4.00
Output price / 1M$15.00$12.00win
Cached input / 1M

Price of an input token served from the prompt cache, where the provider publishes one.

$0.250win$0.500
Context window1.1M1M
Max output tokens128K131K

Benchmarks by category

An overall score averages away the thing you probably care about. These are the seven LiveBench categories scored separately — GPT-5.4 on top, Qwen3.8 Max Prime below, both out of 100.

Agentic coding
53.8
—
Coding
77.5
—
Reasoning
88.1
—
Mathematics
94.1
—
Data analysis
79.3
—
Language
82.6
—
Instruction following
70.2
—

What each one costs to run

Per-token prices are hard to feel. These are monthly list costs for both models across five workload shapes, using each provider's published cached-input rate where there is one.

WorkloadGPT-5.4Qwen3.8 Max Prime
Support chatbot

1.2K in / 400 out × 200K requests

$1,638/mo$1,668/mo
RAG assistant

8K in / 600 out × 100K requests

$2,000/mo$2,520/mo
Coding agent

40K in / 4K out × 20K requests

$1,940/mo$2,200/mo
Document extraction

20K in / 1.5K out × 50K requests

$3,513/mo$4,725/mo
Bulk classification

500 in / 20 out × 5M requests

$6,625/mo$9,450/mo
Run these two through the cost calculator

GPT-5.4 vs Qwen3.8 Max Prime FAQ

Which is better, GPT-5.4 or Qwen3.8 Max Prime?

GPT-5.4 and Qwen3.8 Max Prime are priced within ~10% of each other. Qwen3.8 Max Prime does not have a published LiveBench run, so this comparison covers price, context and declared capabilities only. A missing score means "not evaluated", not "worse" — the right way to separate these two is an eval on your own workload.

Is GPT-5.4 cheaper than Qwen3.8 Max Prime?

They cost about the same. Both land near $5.63 per million tokens on a 3:1 input:output blend, so price is unlikely to be the deciding factor between them.

Does GPT-5.4 or Qwen3.8 Max Prime have a bigger context window?

They are effectively the same — 1.1M for GPT-5.4 and 1M for Qwen3.8 Max Prime.

Do GPT-5.4 and Qwen3.8 Max Prime support prompt caching?

Both publish a cached-input rate: $0.250 per million for GPT-5.4 and $0.500 for Qwen3.8 Max Prime, against full input rates of $2.50 and $4.00. On a workload with a long stable prefix — a system prompt, a tool schema, a retrieved corpus — that changes the economics more than the headline price does.

Related comparisons

How these numbers are produced

  • Price — provider list price from OpenRouter, refreshed every 15 minutes. “Blended” is a 3:1 input:output mix.
  • Scores — LiveBench release 2026-06-25, using their own category map. Each model shows its strongest published run. A blank means “not evaluated”, never “bad”.
  • Cost per point — the measured dollars LiveBench spent on the run, divided by the score it earned.
  • “Win” — awarded only past a threshold: one full point on a benchmark score, 10% on a price, 25% on a context window. Anything tighter reports as a tie, because effort settings alone move a LiveBench score by more than that.

Published benchmarks rank models on someone else's tasks. Before committing, see LLM & agent evaluation for building an eval on your own.