Qwen3 Coder Next vs Pareto 26.9
Qwen3 Coder Next costs 9.4x less per output token than Pareto 26.9 ($0.80 vs $7.50 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $0.80
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $7.50
Qwen3 Coder Next or Pareto 26.9: which to pick
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Qwen3 Coder Next for output tokens 9.4x cheaper ($0.80 vs $7.50 per million).
No benchmark has tested both yet. Qwen3 Coder Next has results on AA Coding Index, SciCode and Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run); Pareto 26.9 has none yet. 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
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
No call
Only Qwen3 Coder Next has a AA Intelligence Index result, 9.2.
Directional only
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
No call
Only Qwen3 Coder Next has a AA Agentic Index result, 0.9.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
No call
Both take 262K tokens.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen3 Coder Next
Qwen3 Coder Next $0.0005, Pareto 26.9 $0.0063 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Qwen3 Coder Next not benchmarked, Pareto 26.9 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
- Qwen3 Coder Next $0.80 against Pareto 26.9 $7.50 per million output tokens, 9.4x apart.
- Context window
- Both take 262K 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 Index4 boards measured
| Benchmark | Qwen3 Coder Next | Pareto 26.9 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Coding Index | 36.2 | Not measured | Only Qwen3 Coder Next measured |
| SciCode | 36.2% | Not measured | Only Qwen3 Coder Next measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 18.2% | Not measured | Only Qwen3 Coder Next measured |
| WeirdML | 34.4% | Not measured | Only Qwen3 Coder Next measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here | |||
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
| Benchmark | Qwen3 Coder Next | Pareto 26.9 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 9.2 | Not measured | Only Qwen3 Coder Next measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
| Benchmark | Qwen3 Coder Next | Pareto 26.9 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | 0.9 | Not measured | Only Qwen3 Coder Next measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 79.5% | Not measured | Only Qwen3 Coder Next measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here | |||
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
| Benchmark | Qwen3 Coder Next | Pareto 26.9 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 73.7% | Not measured | Only Qwen3 Coder Next measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 10.1% | Not measured | Only Qwen3 Coder Next measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 20 boards here | |||
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
| Benchmark | Qwen3 Coder Next | Pareto 26.9 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBench | 35.2% | Not measured | Only Qwen3 Coder Next measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 47.0% | Not measured | Only Qwen3 Coder Next measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 44 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 Coder Next costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Qwen3 Coder Next costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Qwen3 Coder Next 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 | Qwen3 Coder Next | Pareto 26.9 |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Qwen | Unbiased |
| Weights | Open weights | No public weights listed |
| Released | February 4, 2026 | October 13, 2026 |
| Context window | 262K | 262K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.12 | $2.50 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.80 | $7.50 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Qwen3 Coder Next better than Pareto 26.9 for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Qwen3 Coder Next for output tokens 9.4x cheaper ($0.80 vs $7.50 per million).
Which is cheaper, Qwen3 Coder Next or Pareto 26.9?
Qwen3 Coder Next costs $0.12 per million input tokens and $0.80 per million output tokens; Pareto 26.9 costs $2.50 and $7.50. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Qwen3 Coder Next or Pareto 26.9?
Neither: both take 262K tokens.
Has any benchmark tested both Qwen3 Coder Next and Pareto 26.9?
No benchmark has tested both yet. Qwen3 Coder Next has results on AA Coding Index, SciCode and Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run); Pareto 26.9 has none yet. Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 22, 2026.