GPT-6.1 Terra (Non-reasoning) vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Which is better for the money: GPT-6.1 Terra (Non-reasoning) by OpenAI or Qwen3.8-Flash-Next by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-27.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next scores 6.3 points higher (39.8 vs 33.5) but costs 2.4× as much to run the benchmark ($363 vs $154; both mid-range class). Pick Qwen3.8-Flash-Next when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise GPT-6.1 Terra (Non-reasoning).
| Metric | GPT-6.1 Terra (Non-reasoning) | Qwen3.8-Flash-Next | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 33.5 | 39.8 | +18.8% Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is 18.8% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $153.58 | $362.72 | +136.2% Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is 2.4× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 6.61s | 49.36s | +646.7% Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is 646.7% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $1.00 / $5.00 | $0.15 / $0.47 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image, Video |
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next vs GPT-6.1 Terra (Non-reasoning): 18.8% more intelligence, 136.2% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 646.7% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-6.1 Terra (Non-reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Max) scores 38.10 for $122.
- 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-6.1 Terra (Non-reasoning)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-6-1-terra-non-reasoning/qwen3-8-flash-next · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-6-1-terra-non-reasoning/qwen3-8-flash-next?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill