Qwen-Plus vs Qwen3.8 Flash
Qwen3.8 Flash costs 1.7x less per output token than Qwen-Plus ($0.47 vs $0.78 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $0.78
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $0.47
Qwen-Plus or Qwen3.8 Flash: which to pick
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Compare them on price, context and the boards below.
No benchmark has tested both yet. Qwen-Plus has results on LMArena Text: coding, LMArena Text: software and IT and GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run); Qwen3.8 Flash on LiveBench coding, LiveBench research and LiveBench browser. Compare them on price and context instead.
Which one for your work
Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Long documents
Listed context window
No call
Both take 1M tokens.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen3.8 Flash
Qwen-Plus $0.0006, Qwen3.8 Flash $0.0004 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Qwen-Plus not benchmarked, Qwen3.8 Flash not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- None yet: no category has been tested on both models.
- Widest single gap
- None yet: no benchmark has tested both models.
- Output price
- Qwen-Plus $0.78 against Qwen3.8 Flash $0.47 per million output tokens, 1.7x apart.
- Context window
- Both take 1M tokens.
Benchmark by benchmark
Every board either model has a result on, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale. Only one model is measured on each, so no row names a leader.
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index3 boards measured
| Benchmark | Qwen-Plus | Qwen3.8 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench coding | Not measured | 87.4% | Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1328 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1343 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 36 boards here | |||
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards measured
| Benchmark | Qwen-Plus | Qwen3.8 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench research | Not measured | 74.6% | Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured |
| LiveBench browser | Not measured | 48.0% | Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured |
| LiveBench long agentic | Not measured | 37.1% | Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here | |||
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards measured
| Benchmark | Qwen-Plus | Qwen3.8 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench reasoning | Not measured | 87.4% | Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 48.1% | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1317 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1328 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1333 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards measured
| Benchmark | Qwen-Plus | Qwen3.8 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME | 17.8% | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| MATH level 5 | 65.3% | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: math | 1326 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | 1332 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards measured
| Benchmark | Qwen-Plus | Qwen3.8 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text: science | 1352 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1350 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1349 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1303 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
| Benchmark | Qwen-Plus | Qwen3.8 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench design | Not measured | 72.8% | Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here | |||
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index15 boards measured
| Benchmark | Qwen-Plus | Qwen3.8 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench data analysis | Not measured | 74.2% | Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured |
| DTBench | 81.1% | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMCA | 24.0% | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text | 1326 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1303 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1292 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: English | 1339 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1310 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1347 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | 1251 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1323 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1336 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1324 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1296 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1270 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 31 boards here | |||
What each workload costs
Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.
Chat turn
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen3.8 Flash costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Qwen3.8 Flash costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Qwen3.8 Flash costs less
Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.
Specification differences
The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.
| Specification | Qwen-Plus | Qwen3.8 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Qwen | Qwen |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | February 1, 2025 | August 26, 2026 |
| Context window | 1M | 1M |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.26 | $0.15 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.78 | $0.47 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 1 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Qwen-Plus better than Qwen3.8 Flash for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Compare them on price, context and the boards below.
Which is cheaper, Qwen-Plus or Qwen3.8 Flash?
Qwen-Plus costs $0.26 per million input tokens and $0.78 per million output tokens; Qwen3.8 Flash costs $0.15 and $0.47. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Qwen-Plus or Qwen3.8 Flash?
Neither: both take 1M tokens.
Has any benchmark tested both Qwen-Plus and Qwen3.8 Flash?
No benchmark has tested both yet. Qwen-Plus has results on LMArena Text: coding, LMArena Text: software and IT and GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run); Qwen3.8 Flash on LiveBench coding, LiveBench research and LiveBench browser. Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 21, 2026.