Celeris-1 vs Qwen3 Coder Next
Which is better for the money: Celeris-1 by Celeris or Qwen3 Coder Next by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-09-07.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Qwen3 Coder Next scores 6.5 points higher (14.1 vs 7.6) but costs 2.3× as much to run the benchmark ($388 vs $171; both mid-range class). Pick Qwen3 Coder Next when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Celeris-1.
| Metric | Celeris-1 | Qwen3 Coder Next | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 7.6 | 14.1 | +85.5% Qwen3 Coder Next is 85.5% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $170.68 | $388.17 | +127.4% Qwen3 Coder Next is 2.3× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 0.95s | 5.52s | +481.1% Qwen3 Coder Next is 481.1% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.20 / $0.70 | $0.35 / $1.20 | |
| Input modalities | Not reported | Not reported |
Qwen3 Coder Next vs Celeris-1: 85.5% more intelligence, 127.4% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 481.1% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Celeris-1 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-5.6 Luna (xhigh) scores 41.60 for $119.
- Qwen3 Coder Next is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GLM-5.3-Flash scores 46.20 for $219.
Celeris-1Qwen3 Coder NextToday's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/celeris-1/qwen3-coder-next · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/celeris-1/qwen3-coder-next?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill