LongCat 2.0 vs Qwen3 Coder Next
Which is better for the money: LongCat 2.0 by LongCat or Qwen3 Coder Next 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
LongCat 2.0 scores 9.9 points higher (19.1 vs 9.2) but costs 1.3× as much to run the benchmark ($545 vs $405; premium vs mid-range cost classes). Pick LongCat 2.0 when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Qwen3 Coder Next.
| Metric | LongCat 2.0 | Qwen3 Coder Next | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 19.1 | 9.2 | −51.8% Qwen3 Coder Next is 51.8% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $544.74 | $405.10 | −25.6% Qwen3 Coder Next is 25.6% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 35.51s | 6.22s | −82.5% Qwen3 Coder Next is 82.5% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.75 / $2.95 | $0.31 / $1.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text |
Qwen3 Coder Next vs LongCat 2.0: 51.8% less intelligence, 25.6% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 82.5% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- LongCat 2.0 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (High) scores 50.20 for $521.
- Qwen3 Coder Next is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Medium) scores 47.80 for $361.
LongCat 2.0Qwen3 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/longcat-2-0/qwen3-coder-next · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/longcat-2-0/qwen3-coder-next?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill