| Signal | GPT-4 Turbo | Delta | Qwen-Turbo |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 67 | +17 | |
Benchmarks | 78 | +78 | |
Pricing | 30 | +30 | |
Context window size | 81 | 0 | |
Recency | 2 | -54 | |
Output Capacity | 60 | -5 | |
| Overall Result | 3 wins | of 6 | 3 wins |
9
days higher
5
days
16
days higher
OpenAI
Alibaba
Qwen-Turbo saves you $2490.25/month
That's $29883.00/year compared to GPT-4 Turbo at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
| Metric | GPT-4 Turbo | Qwen-Turbo | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 60 | 60 | Qwen-Turbo |
| Rank | #226 | #225 | Qwen-Turbo |
| Quality Rank | #226 | #225 | Qwen-Turbo |
| Adoption Rank | #226 | #225 | Qwen-Turbo |
| Parameters | -- | -- | -- |
| Context Window | 128K | 131K | Qwen-Turbo |
| Pricing | $10.00/$30.00/M | $0.03/$0.13/M | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 67 | 50 | GPT-4 Turbo |
| Benchmarks | 78 | -- | GPT-4 Turbo |
| Pricing | 30 | 0 | GPT-4 Turbo |
| Context window size | 81 | 81 | Qwen-Turbo |
| Recency | 2 | 56 | Qwen-Turbo |
| Output Capacity | 60 | 65 | Qwen-Turbo |
Our composite score (0–100) combines six weighted signals: benchmark performance (25%), pricing efficiency (25%), context window size (15%), model recency (15%), output capacity (10%), and capability versatility (10%). Here's what the scores mean for these two models:
Scores 60/100 (rank #226), placing it in the top 22% of all 290 models tracked.
Scores 60/100 (rank #225), placing it in the top 23% of all 290 models tracked.
With only a 0-point gap, these models are in the same performance tier. The practical difference in output quality is minimal - your choice should depend on pricing, latency requirements, and specific feature needs.
Qwen-Turbo offers 100% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $2.44/month with Qwen-Turbo vs $600.00/month with GPT-4 Turbo - a $597.56 monthly difference.
Both models have comparable response speeds. For most applications, the latency difference is negligible.
When latency matters most: Interactive chatbots, IDE code completion, real-time translation, and user-facing applications where response time directly impacts experience. For batch processing, background summarization, or offline analysis, latency is less critical.
Code generation & review
Higher benchmark score (0/100) indicates stronger performance on coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring
Customer support chatbot
Faster response time (speed score 0/100) is critical for user-facing chat. Qwen-Turbo also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support
Long document analysis
Larger context window (131K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass
Batch data extraction
Lower output pricing ($0.13/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily
Creative writing & content
Higher overall composite score (60/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content
Image understanding & OCR
Supports vision input - can analyze screenshots, diagrams, photos, and scanned documents directly
GPT-4 Turbo and Qwen-Turbo are extremely close in overall performance (only 0.09999999999999432 points apart). Your best choice depends entirely on which specific strengths matter most for your use case.
Best for Quality
GPT-4 Turbo
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
Qwen-Turbo
100% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
GPT-4 Turbo
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
GPT-4 Turbo
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
GPT-4 Turbo
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by OpenAI
| Capability | GPT-4 Turbo | Qwen-Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (Image Input)differs | ||
| Function Calling | ||
| Streaming | ||
| JSON Mode | ||
| Reasoning | ||
| Web Search | ||
| Image Output |
OpenAI
Alibaba
Qwen-Turbo saves you $53.79/month
That's 100% cheaper than GPT-4 Turbo at 1,000 tokens/request and 100 requests/day.
Assumes 60% input / 40% output token ratio per request. Actual costs may vary based on your usage pattern.
| Parameter | GPT-4 Turbo | Qwen-Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| Context Window | 128K | 131K |
| Max Output Tokens | 4,096 | 8,192 |
| Open Source | No | No |
| Created | Apr 9, 2024 | Feb 1, 2025 |
Qwen-Turbo scores 60/100 (rank #225) compared to GPT-4 Turbo's 60/100 (rank #226), giving it a 0-point advantage. Qwen-Turbo is the stronger overall choice, though GPT-4 Turbo may excel in specific areas like certain benchmarks.
GPT-4 Turbo is ranked #226 and Qwen-Turbo is ranked #225 out of 290+ AI models. Rankings use a composite score combining benchmark performance (25%), pricing (25%), context window (15%), recency (15%), output capacity (10%), and versatility (10%). Scores update hourly.
Qwen-Turbo is cheaper at $0.13/M output tokens vs GPT-4 Turbo's $30.00/M output tokens - 230.8x more expensive. Input token pricing: GPT-4 Turbo at $10.00/M vs Qwen-Turbo at $0.03/M.
Qwen-Turbo has a larger context window of 131,072 tokens compared to GPT-4 Turbo's 128,000 tokens. A larger context window means the model can process longer documents and conversations.