tokevenGPTvsAlibaba (Qwen)
GPT 4.1 Nano vs Qwen 3.8 Flash
Side-by-side comparison of pricing, task quality, and projected cost at higher scale.
Pricing
Side-by-side pricing
GPT 4.1 Nano
Fast / BudgetQwen 3.8 Flash
Fast / BudgetInput $/MTok
$0.10
$0.15
Output $/MTok
$0.40
$0.47
Cache discount
75% off
89% off
Context
1.0M
1M
Quality
Task confidence comparison
Confidence score from zero to one hundred by task type, where higher is better.
Code Generation
0
vs
0
Code Review
0
vs
0
Summarization
0
vs
0
Q&A
0
vs
0
Extraction
0
vs
0
Reasoning
0
vs
0
Classification
0
vs
0
Creative Writing
0
vs
0
GPT 4.1 Nano
Qwen 3.8 Flash
Guidance
When to use GPT 4.1 Nano vs Qwen 3.8 Flash
Choose GPT 4.1 Nano when...
- -Cost matters: 33% cheaper on input tokens
- -You need a larger context window (1.0M vs 1M)
Choose Qwen 3.8 Flash when...
- Similar performance; consider provider preference or ecosystem fit.
At scale
Cost at scale
Estimated cost assuming a seventy percent input and thirty percent output token split.
GPT 4.1 Nano
Qwen 3.8 Flash
100K tokens
$0.02Cheaper
$0.02
1M tokens
$0.19Cheaper
$0.25
10M tokens
$1.90Cheaper
$2.46
FAQ
When should I use GPT 4.1 Nano instead of Qwen 3.8 Flash?
GPT 4.1 Nano and Qwen 3.8 Flash perform similarly across all tracked tasks. Pick based on pricing and provider preference.
Is Qwen 3.8 Flash cheaper than GPT 4.1 Nano?
Qwen 3.8 Flash input costs $0.15/MTok, which is 50% more than GPT 4.1 Nano at $0.10/MTok.
What are the context window sizes for GPT 4.1 Nano and Qwen 3.8 Flash?
GPT 4.1 Nano has a 1.0M token context window. Qwen 3.8 Flash has a 1M token context window.
Go deeper on either model
Per-call cost calculators, provider lineups, and price history for both models on this page.
Other comparisons
How GPT 4.1 Nano and Qwen 3.8 Flash stack up against the rest of the field.
Track your real costs
Comparisons show estimated costs at list price. The dashboard reveals your real spend and savings.