Llama 4 Scout vs Qwen3.8 Max (0902)
Which is better for the money: Llama 4 Scout by Meta or Qwen3.8 Max (0902) by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Qwen3.8 Max (0902) scores 38.9 points higher (45.4 vs 6.5) but costs 67× as much to run the benchmark ($4935 vs $73.6; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Qwen3.8 Max (0902) when you need intelligence above 6.5, and Llama 4 Scout when 6.5 is enough.
| Metric | Llama 4 Scout | Qwen3.8 Max (0902) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 6.5 | 45.4 | +598.5% Qwen3.8 Max (0902) is 7.0× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $73.56 | $4,934.79 | +6608.5% Qwen3.8 Max (0902) is 67× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 4.99s | 62.92s | +1160.9% Qwen3.8 Max (0902) is 1160.9% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.18 / $0.66 | $2.00 / $6.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Qwen3.8 Max (0902) vs Llama 4 Scout: 598.5% more intelligence, 6608.5% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 1160.9% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Llama 4 Scout is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Xhigh) scores 34.60 for $66.8.
- Qwen3.8 Max (0902) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) scores 56.00 for $4057.
Llama 4 ScoutQwen3.8 Max (0902)Today'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/llama-4-scout/qwen3-8-max · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/llama-4-scout/qwen3-8-max?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill