GPT-6 Luna (Max) vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Which is better for the money: GPT-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 1.7 points higher (39.8 vs 38.1) but costs 3.0× as much to run the benchmark ($363 vs $122; both mid-range class). Pick Qwen3.8-Flash-Next when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise GPT-6 Luna (Max).
| Metric | GPT-6 Luna (Max) | Qwen3.8-Flash-Next | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 38.1 | 39.8 | +4.5% Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is 4.5% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $122.05 | $362.72 | +197.2% Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is 3.0× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 93.85s | 50.47s | −46.2% Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is 46.2% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.10 / $0.50 | $0.15 / $0.47 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image, Video |
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next vs GPT-6 Luna (Max): 4.5% more intelligence, 197.2% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 46.2% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-6 Luna (Max) is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
- 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 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-6-luna/qwen3-8-flash-next · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-6-luna/qwen3-8-flash-next?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill