HyperNova 60B 2605 vs Qwen3 Coder Next
Which is better for the money: HyperNova 60B 2605 by Multiverse Computing or Qwen3 Coder Next by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-09-01.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Qwen3 Coder Next scores 3.0 points higher (21.3 vs 18.3) but costs 6.7× as much to run the benchmark ($250 vs $37.5; mid-range vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Qwen3 Coder Next when you need intelligence above 18.3, and HyperNova 60B 2605 when 18.3 is enough.
| Metric | HyperNova 60B 2605 | Qwen3 Coder Next | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 18.3 | 21.3 | +16.4% Qwen3 Coder Next is 16.4% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $37.50 | $250.18 | +567.1% Qwen3 Coder Next is 6.7× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 8.15s | 4.61s | −43.4% Qwen3 Coder Next is 43.4% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.04 / $0.14 | $0.35 / $1.20 | |
| Input modalities | Not reported | Not reported |
Qwen3 Coder Next vs HyperNova 60B 2605: 16.4% more intelligence, 567.1% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 43.4% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- HyperNova 60B 2605 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-5.6 Luna (medium) scores 38.90 for $21.5.
- Qwen3 Coder Next is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GLM-5.3-Flash scores 57.50 for $138.
HyperNova 60B 2605Qwen3 Coder 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/hypernova-60b/qwen3-coder-next · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/hypernova-60b/qwen3-coder-next?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill