DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning) vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Which is better for the money: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning) by DeepSeek or Qwen3.8-Flash-Next by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next scores 15.1 points higher (39.8 vs 24.7) but costs 1.5× as much to run the benchmark ($363 vs $239; both mid-range class). Pick Qwen3.8-Flash-Next when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning).
| Metric | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning) | Qwen3.8-Flash-Next | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 24.7 | 39.8 | +61.1% Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is 61.1% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $238.91 | $362.72 | +51.8% Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is 51.8% more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 2.74s | 50.49s | +1742.7% Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is 1742.7% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $1.20 | $0.15 / $0.47 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image, Video |
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning): 61.1% more intelligence, 51.8% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 1742.7% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Medium) scores 47.80 for $361.
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning)Qwen3.8-Flash-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/deepseek-v4-1-flash-non-reasoning/qwen3-8-flash-next · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/deepseek-v4-1-flash-non-reasoning/qwen3-8-flash-next?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill