Qwen3.7 Plus vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Which is better for the money: Qwen3.7 Plus 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 14.7 points higher (39.9 vs 25.2) but costs 6.2× as much to run the benchmark ($2632 vs $428; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B when you need intelligence above 25.2, and Qwen3.7 Plus when 25.2 is enough.
| Metric | Qwen3.7 Plus | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 25.2 | 39.9 | +58.3% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 58.3% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $427.73 | $2,632.05 | +515.4% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 6.2× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 46.28s | 64.84s | +40.1% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 40.1% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.40 / $1.60 | $2.00 / $6.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Video | Text |
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs Qwen3.7 Plus: 58.3% more intelligence, 515.4% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 40.1% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Qwen3.7 Plus is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Medium) scores 47.80 for $361.
- 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 PlusQwen3.8 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-plus/qwen3-8-2-4t-a95b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/qwen3-7-plus/qwen3-8-2-4t-a95b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill