GPT-5 mini (High) vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Which is better for the money: GPT-5 mini (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 2026-10-26.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B scores 23.1 points higher (39.9 vs 16.8) but costs 14× as much to run the benchmark ($2632 vs $189; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B when you need intelligence above 16.8, and GPT-5 mini (High) when 16.8 is enough.
| Metric | GPT-5 mini (High) | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 16.8 | 39.9 | +137.5% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 2.4× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $188.66 | $2,632.05 | +1295.1% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 14× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 68.16s | 65.43s | −4.0% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 4.0% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.25 / $2.00 | $2.00 / $6.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs GPT-5 mini (High): 137.5% more intelligence, 1295.1% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 4.0% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-5 mini (High) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Haiku 5.5 (Xhigh) scores 41.20 for $158.
- 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 mini (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-mini/qwen3-8-2-4t-a95b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-5-mini/qwen3-8-2-4t-a95b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill