GPT-5.6 Sol (Xhigh) vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Which is better for the money: GPT-5.6 Sol (Xhigh) 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
GPT-5.6 Sol (Xhigh) scores 4.2 points higher (44.0 vs 39.8) but costs 5.7× as much to run the benchmark ($2082 vs $363; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick GPT-5.6 Sol (Xhigh) when you need intelligence above 39.8, and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next when 39.8 is enough.
| Metric | GPT-5.6 Sol (Xhigh) | Qwen3.8-Flash-Next | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 44.0 | 39.8 | −9.5% Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is 9.5% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $2,082.28 | $362.72 | −82.6% Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is 82.6% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 62.17s | 50.19s | −19.3% Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is 19.3% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $4.00 / $20.0 | $0.15 / $0.47 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image, Video |
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next vs GPT-5.6 Sol (Xhigh): 9.5% less intelligence, 82.6% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 19.3% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-5.6 Sol (Xhigh) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
- 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 Sol (Xhigh)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-sol-xhigh/qwen3-8-flash-next · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-5-6-sol-xhigh/qwen3-8-flash-next?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill