GPT-5.6 Terra (High) vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Which is better for the money: GPT-5.6 Terra (High) 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 5.7 points higher (39.9 vs 34.2) but costs 3.4× as much to run the benchmark ($2632 vs $768; flagship vs premium cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B when you need intelligence above 34.2, and GPT-5.6 Terra (High) when 34.2 is enough.
| Metric | GPT-5.6 Terra (High) | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 34.2 | 39.9 | +16.7% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 16.7% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $767.78 | $2,632.05 | +242.8% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 3.4× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 6.53s | 64.93s | +894.3% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 894.3% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $2.00 / $12.0 | $2.00 / $6.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs GPT-5.6 Terra (High): 16.7% more intelligence, 242.8% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 894.3% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-5.6 Terra (High) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.
- 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 Terra (High)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-terra-high/qwen3-8-2-4t-a95b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-5-6-terra-high/qwen3-8-2-4t-a95b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill