Qwen3.8 Max vs Beam 1.0
Which is better for the money: Qwen3.8 Max by Alibaba or Beam 1.0 by Reflection? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-24.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Qwen3.8 Max scores 9.9 points higher (40.2 vs 30.3) but costs 10.0× as much to run the benchmark ($3172 vs $319; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Qwen3.8 Max when you need intelligence above 30.3, and Beam 1.0 when 30.3 is enough.
| Metric | Qwen3.8 Max | Beam 1.0 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 40.2 | 30.3 | −24.6% Beam 1.0 is 24.6% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $3,172.37 | $318.73 | −90.0% Beam 1.0 is 90.0% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 62.83s | 8.02s | −87.2% Beam 1.0 is 87.2% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $2.00 / $6.00 | $0.40 / $1.20 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Video | Text |
Beam 1.0 vs Qwen3.8 Max: 24.6% less intelligence, 90.0% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 87.2% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Qwen3.8 Max is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Kimi K3.1 Pro scores 55.10 for $3117.
- Beam 1.0 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
Qwen3.8 MaxBeam 1.0Today'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-max-0803/reflection-beam · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/qwen3-8-max-0803/reflection-beam?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill