Claude Sonnet 5 (Xhigh) vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Which is better for the money: Claude Sonnet 5 (Xhigh) by Anthropic or Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-27.
Clear winner
Verdict
Pick Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs Claude Sonnet 5 (Xhigh): 16.0% more intelligence, 19.1% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 96.5% slower end-to-end.
| Metric | Claude Sonnet 5 (Xhigh) | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 34.4 | 39.9 | +16.0% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 16.0% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $3,255.40 | $2,632.05 | −19.1% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 19.1% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 32.44s | 63.76s | +96.5% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 96.5% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $2.00 / $10.0 | $2.00 / $6.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Sonnet 5 (Xhigh) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Kimi K3.1 Pro scores 55.10 for $3117.
- Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) scores 53.60 for $2172.
Claude Sonnet 5 (Xhigh)Qwen3.8 2.4T A95BToday'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/claude-sonnet-5-xhigh/qwen3-8-2-4t-a95b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-sonnet-5-xhigh/qwen3-8-2-4t-a95b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill