Noometry

Model comparison

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 vs Qwen3.8 Max

Qwen3.8 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 41.3 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 Tencent

41.3

Rank #139 Confirmed

Qwen3.8 Max Alibaba (Qwen)

56.8

Rank #22 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.8 Max in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.8 Max leads 73.2 to 37.5.

Side by side

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226Qwen3.8 Max
ProviderTencentAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index41.356.8
Released—2026-08-02
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window—1M
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$2
Output $ / M tokens—$6
Results tracked1639

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.8 Max leads

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 40.0 (#152), Qwen3.8 Max: 53.5 (#29)

BenchmarkHunyuan Turbos 20250226Qwen3.8 Max
LMArena Coding13611502
DeepSWE—57.5%
LMArena WebDev—1674
FrontierSWE—17.8%
SciCode—53.2%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 45.4 (#14)

BenchmarkHunyuan Turbos 20250226Qwen3.8 Max
APEX-Agents—63.3%
τ²-bench Banking—55.1%
GDP.pdf—23.2%

Reasoning Qwen3.8 Max leads

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 27.8 (#113), Qwen3.8 Max: 54.4 (#26)

BenchmarkHunyuan Turbos 20250226Qwen3.8 Max
LMArena Hard Prompts13741496
NYT Connections (extended)—88.3%
CritPt—20%
Chess Puzzles—40%
Mystery Game Puzzles—38%
DTBench—92%
LMCA—46.2%
Epoch Capabilities Index—156.41

Math Qwen3.8 Max leads

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 37.5 (#154), Qwen3.8 Max: 73.2 (#20)

BenchmarkHunyuan Turbos 20250226Qwen3.8 Max
LMArena Math13591499
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—74.7%
FrontierMath Tier 4—46.3%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—100%
ProofBench—58%

Knowledge Qwen3.8 Max leads

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 37.0 (#161), Qwen3.8 Max: 61.7 (#27)

BenchmarkHunyuan Turbos 20250226Qwen3.8 Max
LMArena Expert13391507
GPQA Diamond—92.7%
SimpleQA Verified—47.3%

Multimodal Not comparable

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 37.2 (#75)

BenchmarkHunyuan Turbos 20250226Qwen3.8 Max
LMArena Vision—1314
Furniture Assembly—20%

Multilingual Qwen3.8 Max leads

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 48.9 (#136), Qwen3.8 Max: 56.7 (#18)

BenchmarkHunyuan Turbos 20250226Qwen3.8 Max
LMArena Non-English13631472
LMArena Chinese14171538
LMArena French13911503
LMArena German13551483
LMArena Japanese13421467
LMArena Korean13511461
LMArena Russian13681481
LMArena Spanish—1492

Instruction Following Qwen3.8 Max leads

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 71.0 (#158), Qwen3.8 Max: 77.6 (#17)

BenchmarkHunyuan Turbos 20250226Qwen3.8 Max
LMArena Instruction Following13441479

Long Context Qwen3.8 Max leads

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 41.6 (#136), Qwen3.8 Max: 45.6 (#31)

BenchmarkHunyuan Turbos 20250226Qwen3.8 Max
LMArena Longer Query13661489

Writing & Preference Qwen3.8 Max leads

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 57.4 (#128), Qwen3.8 Max: 67.1 (#30)

BenchmarkHunyuan Turbos 20250226Qwen3.8 Max
LMArena Text13771483
LMArena Creative Writing13591479
LMArena Multi-Turn13871489

Frequently asked questions

Is Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 better than Qwen3.8 Max?

Qwen3.8 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 41.3 on the Noometry Index.

Is Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 or Qwen3.8 Max better for coding?

Qwen3.8 Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.5 versus 40.0 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 and Qwen3.8 Max share?

16 benchmarks have published results for both models. Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 has 16 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.8 Max has 39.

Related comparisons

Go deeper