Qwen3 6 vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Qwen3 6 Verdict
- Qwen3 6 (max) leads on quality: 63.3 vs 61.6.
- Qwen3 6 (max) is stronger in agents & tools, human preference, instruction following, knowledge, long context, maths.
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is stronger in coding, composite, reasoning, multimodal.
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is 13× cheaper ($0.230 vs $2.96 per 1M blended).
| Metric | Qwen3 6 (max) | Qwen3.8-Flash-Next |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 63.3 | 61.6 |
| Agents & tools score | 71.9 | 65.8 |
| Coding score | 58.1 | 71.2 |
| Composite score | 64.9 | 67.4 |
| Human preference score | 65.7 | – |
| Instruction following score | 74.4 | – |
| Knowledge score | 64.0 | 59.6 |
| Long context score | 66.8 | 66.3 |
| Maths score | 65.9 | – |
| Reasoning score | 59.1 | 63.4 |
| Multimodal score | – | 64.3 |
| Blended price $/M | $2.96 | $0.230 |
| Output speed | 63 tok/s | 55 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 35.0 s | 39.0 s |
| Context window | 246k | 256k |
| 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 | 1635 |
| LMArena Agent | – | -0.1 |
| LiveBench | – | 76.2% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | – | 87.4% |
| LiveBench Coding | – | 72.5% |
| LiveBench Agentic Coding | – | 61.6% |
| LiveBench Mathematics | – | 85.8% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | – | 74.2% |
| LiveBench Language | – | 74.6% |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | – | 77.1% |
| AA Intelligence Index | 28.4 | 39.9 |
| IFBench | 76.6% | – |
| AA-LCR | 80.7% | 79.7% |
| MMMU-Pro | – | 79.8% |
| AA-Omniscience | 9.2 | -9.7 |
| Terminal-Bench Hard | 43.9% | – |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | 88.8% | 92.3% |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | 30.8% | 38.0% |
| SciCode (AA) | – | 50.6% |
| τ²-Bench Telecom (AA) | 95.9% | – |
| CorpFin | 66.5% | – |
| SWE-bench (Vals) | 72.8% | – |
| CritPt | 3.7% | 11.1% |
| GDPval (AA) | – | 57.4% |
| τ²-Bench Banking (AA) | – | 45.4% |
| 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-Flash-Next: questions
- Is Qwen3 6 better than Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?
- Qwen3 6 (max) leads on quality: 63.3 vs 61.6. The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; Qwen3 6 (max) is ahead overall as of 2026-09-19, but check the category scores for your use.
- Is Qwen3 6 better than Qwen3.8-Flash-Next for coding?
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next scores higher in coding (71 vs 58 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Is Qwen3 6 better than Qwen3.8-Flash-Next for agentic tasks?
- Qwen3 6 scores higher in agentic tasks (72 vs 66 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Which is cheaper, Qwen3 6 or Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is cheaper: $0.230 against $2.96 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token.
- Which is faster, Qwen3 6 or Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?
- Qwen3 6 streams faster: 63 against 55 output tokens per second.
- Which has the larger context window?
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next accepts more context: 256k against 246k tokens.