Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs Solar Mini 4
Which is better for the money: Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B by Alibaba or Solar Mini 4 by Upstage? 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 15.8 points higher (39.9 vs 24.1) but costs 5.2× as much to run the benchmark ($2632 vs $502; flagship vs premium cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B when you need intelligence above 24.1, and Solar Mini 4 when 24.1 is enough.
| Metric | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Solar Mini 4 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 39.9 | 24.1 | −39.6% Solar Mini 4 is 39.6% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $2,632.05 | $502.02 | −80.9% Solar Mini 4 is 80.9% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 61.67s | 22.91s | −62.9% Solar Mini 4 is 62.9% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $2.00 / $6.00 | $0.10 / $0.40 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text |
Solar Mini 4 vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B: 39.6% less intelligence, 80.9% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 62.9% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- 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.
- Solar Mini 4 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Medium) scores 47.80 for $361.
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95BSolar Mini 4Today'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/qwen3-8-2-4t-a95b/solar-mini4 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/qwen3-8-2-4t-a95b/solar-mini4?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill