Noometry

Model comparison

Qwen3.8 Flash vs Qwen3.8 Max

Qwen3.8 Max has enough public results to be ranked (#21); Qwen3.8 Flash does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

Qwen3.8 Flash Alibaba (Qwen)

35.1

Unranked Sparse

Qwen3.8 Max Alibaba (Qwen)

56.0

Rank #21 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Qwen3.8 Flash scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.8 Max in 1 category; one gap is clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in agentic & tool use, where Qwen3.8 Max leads 42.6 to 31.2.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is GDP.pdf: 16.6% for Qwen3.8 Flash and 23.2% for Qwen3.8 Max.
  • Qwen3.8 Flash is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.47 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $6 for Qwen3.8 Max.

Side by side

Qwen3.8 FlashQwen3.8 Max
ProviderAlibaba (Qwen)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index35.156.0
Released2026-08-262026-08-02
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M1M
Max output131K131K
Input $ / M tokens$0.15$2
Output $ / M tokens$0.47$6
Results tracked138

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Qwen3.8 Flash: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 52.3 (#30)

BenchmarkQwen3.8 FlashQwen3.8 Max
DeepSWE—57.5%
LMArena WebDev—1671
FrontierSWE—15.8%
SciCode—52.9%
LMArena Coding—1499

Agentic & Tool Use Qwen3.8 Max leads

Qwen3.8 Flash: 31.2, Qwen3.8 Max: 42.6 (#17)

BenchmarkQwen3.8 FlashQwen3.8 Max
GDP.pdf16.6%23.2%
τ²-bench Banking—55.1%

Reasoning Not comparable

Qwen3.8 Flash: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 53.4 (#26)

BenchmarkQwen3.8 FlashQwen3.8 Max
NYT Connections (extended)—88.3%
CritPt—20%
Chess Puzzles—40%
LMArena Hard Prompts—1493
Mystery Game Puzzles—38%
DTBench—92%
LMCA—46.2%
Epoch Capabilities Index—156.69

Math Not comparable

Qwen3.8 Flash: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 73.1 (#15)

BenchmarkQwen3.8 FlashQwen3.8 Max
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—74.7%
FrontierMath Tier 4—46.3%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—100%
ProofBench—58%
LMArena Math—1498

Knowledge Not comparable

Qwen3.8 Flash: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 61.7 (#25)

BenchmarkQwen3.8 FlashQwen3.8 Max
GPQA Diamond—92.7%
SimpleQA Verified—47.3%
LMArena Expert—1504

Multimodal Not comparable

Qwen3.8 Flash: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 36.9 (#70)

BenchmarkQwen3.8 FlashQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Vision—1314
Furniture Assembly—20%

Multilingual Not comparable

Qwen3.8 Flash: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 56.6 (#18)

BenchmarkQwen3.8 FlashQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Non-English—1468
LMArena Chinese—1537
LMArena French—1502
LMArena German—1489
LMArena Japanese—1466
LMArena Korean—1467
LMArena Russian—1478
LMArena Spanish—1495

Instruction Following Not comparable

Qwen3.8 Flash: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 77.7 (#19)

BenchmarkQwen3.8 FlashQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Instruction Following—1478

Long Context Not comparable

Qwen3.8 Flash: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 45.5 (#30)

BenchmarkQwen3.8 FlashQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Longer Query—1486

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Qwen3.8 Flash: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 67.0 (#31)

BenchmarkQwen3.8 FlashQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Text—1480
LMArena Creative Writing—1478
LMArena Multi-Turn—1487

Frequently asked questions

Is Qwen3.8 Flash better than Qwen3.8 Max?

Qwen3.8 Max has enough public results to be ranked (#21); Qwen3.8 Flash does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3.8 Flash or Qwen3.8 Max?

Qwen3.8 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.47 per million output tokens; Qwen3.8 Max lists at $2 and $6.

Which has the bigger context window?

Both accept 1M tokens.

How many benchmarks do Qwen3.8 Flash and Qwen3.8 Max share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. Qwen3.8 Flash has 1 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.8 Max has 38.

Related comparisons

Go deeper