GPT-5.6 Luna (Max) vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Which is better for the money: GPT-5.6 Luna (Max) by OpenAI 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.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B scores 2.6 points higher (39.9 vs 37.3) but costs 8.2× as much to run the benchmark ($2632 vs $320; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B when you need intelligence above 37.3, and GPT-5.6 Luna (Max) when 37.3 is enough.
| Metric | GPT-5.6 Luna (Max) | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 37.3 | 39.9 | +7.0% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 7.0% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $319.93 | $2,632.05 | +722.7% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 8.2× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 124.25s | 63.76s | −48.7% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 48.7% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.20 / $1.20 | $2.00 / $6.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs GPT-5.6 Luna (Max): 7.0% more intelligence, 722.7% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 48.7% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-5.6 Luna (Max) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
- 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.
GPT-5.6 Luna (Max)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/gpt-5-6-luna/qwen3-8-2-4t-a95b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-5-6-luna/qwen3-8-2-4t-a95b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill