gpt-oss-20b (High) vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Which is better for the money: gpt-oss-20b (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 30.9 points higher (39.9 vs 9.0) but costs 91× as much to run the benchmark ($2632 vs $28.8; flagship vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B when you need intelligence above 9.0, and gpt-oss-20b (High) when 9.0 is enough.
| Metric | gpt-oss-20b (High) | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 9.0 | 39.9 | +343.3% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 4.4× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $28.81 | $2,632.05 | +9035.9% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 91× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 13.96s | 64.84s | +364.5% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 364.5% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.05 / $0.22 | $2.00 / $6.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text |
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs gpt-oss-20b (High): 343.3% more intelligence, 9035.9% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 364.5% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- gpt-oss-20b (High) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Low) scores 21.50 for $10.6.
- 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-oss-20b (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-oss-20b/qwen3-8-2-4t-a95b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-oss-20b/qwen3-8-2-4t-a95b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill