Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Which is better for the money: Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite by Google 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 24.2 points higher (39.8 vs 15.6) but costs 2.3× as much to run the benchmark ($363 vs $156; both mid-range class). Pick Qwen3.8-Flash-Next when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite.
| Metric | Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite | Qwen3.8-Flash-Next | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 15.6 | 39.8 | +155.1% Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is 2.6× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $155.87 | $362.72 | +132.7% Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is 2.3× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 6.09s | 50.49s | +729.1% Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is 729.1% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.25 / $1.50 | $0.15 / $0.47 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Speech, Video | Text, Image, Video |
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next vs Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite: 155.1% more intelligence, 132.7% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 729.1% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Max) scores 38.10 for $122.
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Medium) scores 47.80 for $361.
Gemini 3.1 Flash-LiteQwen3.8-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/gemini-3-1-flash-lite-preview/qwen3-8-flash-next · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gemini-3-1-flash-lite-preview/qwen3-8-flash-next?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill