Model comparison
GPT-6 Astra vs Qwen3.8 Max
GPT-6 Astra is the stronger model overall, scoring 70.8 to 56.8 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.8 Max costs 6.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-6 Astra's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 38 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 38 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-6 Astra scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen3.8 Max in 3 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where GPT-6 Astra leads 85.1 to 54.4.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Furniture Assembly: 80% for GPT-6 Astra and 20% for Qwen3.8 Max.
- Qwen3.8 Max is cheaper at $2 / $6 per million input/output tokens, against $10 / $50 for GPT-6 Astra.
- GPT-6 Astra accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.
Side by side
| GPT-6 Astra | Qwen3.8 Max | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 70.8 | 56.8 |
| Released | 2026-09-03 | 2026-08-02 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1.05M | 1M |
| Max output | 128K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $10 | $2 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $50 | $6 |
| Results tracked | 56 | 39 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GPT-6 Astra leads
GPT-6 Astra: 73.7 (#2), Qwen3.8 Max: 53.5 (#29)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Astra | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| DeepSWE | 74.1% | 57.5% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1786 | 1674 |
| FrontierSWE | 65.5% | 17.8% |
| SciCode | 56.5% | 53.2% |
| LMArena Coding | 1487 | 1502 |
| FrontierCode | 53.3% | — |
| GSO | 79.4% | — |
| WeirdML | 93.6% | — |
| MirrorCode | 46.7% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 2,951 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use GPT-6 Astra leads
GPT-6 Astra: 52.9 (#3), Qwen3.8 Max: 45.4 (#14)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Astra | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 64.7% | 63.3% |
| GDP.pdf | 34.2% | 23.2% |
| Remote Labor Index | 20.8% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 55.1% |
| BALROG | 68.3% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 15,515 | — |
Reasoning GPT-6 Astra leads
GPT-6 Astra: 85.1 (#1), Qwen3.8 Max: 54.4 (#26)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Astra | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 98.1% | 88.3% |
| CritPt | 31.7% | 20% |
| Chess Puzzles | 72% | 40% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1462 | 1496 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 84% | 38% |
| DTBench | 97.3% | 92% |
| LMCA | 64.4% | 46.2% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 166.45 | 156.41 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 95% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 98.5% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 76.2% | — |
| Bench to the Future 3 | 0.14 | — |
Math GPT-6 Astra leads
GPT-6 Astra: 93.5 (#2), Qwen3.8 Max: 73.2 (#20)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Astra | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 93.7% | 74.7% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 97.6% | 46.3% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 100% | 100% |
| ProofBench | 99% | 58% |
| LMArena Math | 1465 | 1499 |
| FrontierMath Erdős | 2.9% | — |
Knowledge GPT-6 Astra leads
GPT-6 Astra: 75.3 (#1), Qwen3.8 Max: 61.7 (#27)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Astra | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 95.8% | 92.7% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 75.6% | 47.3% |
| LMArena Expert | 1483 | 1507 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 54.8% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 8.7% | — |
Multimodal GPT-6 Astra leads
GPT-6 Astra: 55.0 (#3), Qwen3.8 Max: 37.2 (#75)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Astra | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1281 | 1314 |
| Furniture Assembly | 80% | 20% |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 49.7% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1468 | — |
Multilingual Qwen3.8 Max leads
GPT-6 Astra: 53.7 (#61), Qwen3.8 Max: 56.7 (#18)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Astra | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1430 | 1472 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1484 | 1538 |
| LMArena French | 1456 | 1503 |
| LMArena German | 1440 | 1483 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1379 | 1467 |
| LMArena Korean | 1426 | 1461 |
| LMArena Russian | 1436 | 1481 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1407 | 1492 |
Instruction Following Qwen3.8 Max leads
GPT-6 Astra: 76.3 (#44), Qwen3.8 Max: 77.6 (#17)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Astra | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1450 | 1479 |
Long Context Qwen3.8 Max leads
GPT-6 Astra: 44.5 (#62), Qwen3.8 Max: 45.6 (#31)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Astra | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1456 | 1489 |
Writing & Preference GPT-6 Astra leads
GPT-6 Astra: 75.3 (#7), Qwen3.8 Max: 67.1 (#30)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Astra | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1441 | 1483 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1418 | 1479 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1448 | 1489 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 2173 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-6 Astra better than Qwen3.8 Max?
GPT-6 Astra is the stronger model overall, scoring 70.8 to 56.8 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.8 Max costs 6.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-6 Astra's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GPT-6 Astra or Qwen3.8 Max?
Qwen3.8 Max is cheaper. It lists at $2 per million input tokens and $6 per million output tokens; GPT-6 Astra lists at $10 and $50.
Is GPT-6 Astra or Qwen3.8 Max better for coding?
GPT-6 Astra scores higher on coding benchmarks: 73.7 versus 53.5 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-6 Astra does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.
How many benchmarks do GPT-6 Astra and Qwen3.8 Max share?
38 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-6 Astra has 56 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.8 Max has 39.