Qwen3 6 vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Qwen3 6 Verdict
- Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B leads on quality: 65.2 vs 63.3.
- Qwen3 6 (max) is stronger in coding, human preference, instruction following, long context, maths.
- Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is stronger in agents & tools, composite, knowledge, reasoning.
- They cost about the same ($2.96 per 1M blended).
- Qwen3 6 (max) streams 1.7× faster (63 vs 38 tokens per second).
| Metric | Qwen3 6 (max) | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 63.3 | 65.2 |
| Agents & tools score | 71.9 | 78.3 |
| Coding score | 58.1 | – |
| Composite score | 64.9 | 79.8 |
| Human preference score | 65.7 | – |
| Instruction following score | 74.4 | – |
| Knowledge score | 64.0 | 66.3 |
| Long context score | 66.8 | 66.6 |
| Maths score | 65.9 | – |
| Reasoning score | 59.1 | 80.5 |
| Blended price $/M | $2.96 | $3.00 |
| Output speed | 63 tok/s | 38 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 35.0 s | 55.2 s |
| Context window | 246k | 984k |
| GPQA Diamond | 87.4% | – |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 91.1% | – |
| SWE-bench Verified (Epoch) | 76.7% | – |
| SimpleQA Verified | 52.0% | – |
| SimpleBench | 63.0% | – |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 149.3 | – |
| LMArena Text | 1460 | – |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1482 | – |
| LMArena Coding | 1509 | – |
| LMArena WebDev | 1479 | – |
| AA Intelligence Index | 28.4 | 40.0 |
| IFBench | 76.6% | – |
| AA-LCR | 80.7% | 80.3% |
| AA-Omniscience | 9.2 | 4.3 |
| Terminal-Bench Hard | 43.9% | – |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | 88.8% | 93.5% |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | 30.8% | 42.5% |
| SciCode (AA) | – | 54.0% |
| τ²-Bench Telecom (AA) | 95.9% | – |
| CorpFin | 66.5% | – |
| SWE-bench (Vals) | 72.8% | – |
| CritPt | 3.7% | 20.0% |
| GDPval (AA) | – | 56.4% |
| τ²-Bench Banking (AA) | – | 49.1% |
| CaseLaw v2 | 47.9% | – |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 (Vals) | 51.7% | – |
| LMArena Maths | 1475 | – |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1438 | – |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1449 | – |
| LMArena Multi-turn | 1469 | – |
| LMArena Longer Queries | 1474 | – |
| Chess Puzzles | 20.0% | – |
| LMCA | 42.5% | – |
| DTBench | 87.2% | – |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 4254.2 | – |
Data as of 2026-09-19. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
Qwen3 6 vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B: questions
- Is Qwen3 6 better than Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B?
- Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B leads on quality: 65.2 vs 63.3. The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is ahead overall as of 2026-09-19, but check the category scores for your use.
- Is Qwen3 6 better than Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B for agentic tasks?
- Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B scores higher in agentic tasks (78 vs 72 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Which is cheaper, Qwen3 6 or Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B?
- Qwen3 6 is cheaper: $2.96 against $3.00 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token.
- Which is faster, Qwen3 6 or Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B?
- Qwen3 6 streams faster: 63 against 38 output tokens per second.
- Which has the larger context window?
- Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B accepts more context: 984k against 246k tokens.