Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs Solar Pro 4
Which is better for the money: Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B by Alibaba or Solar Pro 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 13.3 points higher (39.9 vs 26.6) but costs 3.6× as much to run the benchmark ($2632 vs $737; flagship vs premium cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B when you need intelligence above 26.6, and Solar Pro 4 when 26.6 is enough.
| Metric | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Solar Pro 4 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 39.9 | 26.6 | −33.3% Solar Pro 4 is 33.3% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $2,632.05 | $736.82 | −72.0% Solar Pro 4 is 72.0% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 63.65s | Not reported | — not comparable |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $2.00 / $6.00 | $0.30 / $1.20 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text |
Solar Pro 4 vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B: 33.3% less intelligence, 72.0% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and end-to-end time not fully reported.
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 Pro 4 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95BSolar Pro 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-pro4 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/qwen3-8-2-4t-a95b/solar-pro4?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill