GPT-5.6 Luna (Max) vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Which is better for the money: GPT-5.6 Luna (Max) by OpenAI or Qwen3.8-Flash-Next by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next scores 2.5 points higher (39.8 vs 37.3) but costs 1.1× as much to run the benchmark ($363 vs $320; both mid-range class). Pick Qwen3.8-Flash-Next when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise GPT-5.6 Luna (Max).
| Metric | GPT-5.6 Luna (Max) | Qwen3.8-Flash-Next | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 37.3 | 39.8 | +6.7% Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is 6.7% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $319.93 | $362.72 | +13.4% Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is 13.4% more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 114.06s | 50.19s | −56.0% Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is 56.0% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.20 / $1.20 | $0.15 / $0.47 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image, Video |
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next vs GPT-5.6 Luna (Max): 6.7% more intelligence, 13.4% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 56.0% 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-Flash-Next is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Medium) scores 47.80 for $361.
GPT-5.6 Luna (Max)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/gpt-5-6-luna/qwen3-8-flash-next · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-5-6-luna/qwen3-8-flash-next?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill