Qwen3.7 Max vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Which is better for the money: Qwen3.7 Max by Alibaba 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 10.4 points higher (39.9 vs 29.5) but costs 1.3× as much to run the benchmark ($2632 vs $1965; flagship vs premium cost classes). Pick Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Qwen3.7 Max.
| Metric | Qwen3.7 Max | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 29.5 | 39.9 | +35.3% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 35.3% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $1,964.83 | $2,632.05 | +34.0% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 34.0% more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 16.58s | 64.84s | +291.1% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 291.1% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $2.50 / $7.50 | $2.00 / $6.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text |
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs Qwen3.7 Max: 35.3% more intelligence, 34.0% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 291.1% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Qwen3.7 Max is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
- 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.
Qwen3.7 MaxQwen3.8 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/qwen3-7-max/qwen3-8-2-4t-a95b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/qwen3-7-max/qwen3-8-2-4t-a95b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill