Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs Claude Sonnet 4.6

At a Glance

Compare
Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency
IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v2.5UnrankedNot in the 46-model eligible cohort#24 of 4660.3 score · 3/3 sources · complete
CostLower is better · Published-token output estimateUnrankedNot in the 44-model eligible cohort#31 of 44$0.198 per LiveBench case
EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.5UnrankedNot in the 38-model eligible cohort#31 of 3847.3 score · 3/3 sources · complete
Pricing and Limits
Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$2.00Deepinfra · Sep 23, 2026$3.00Anthropic · Sep 3, 2026
Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$6.00Deepinfra · Sep 23, 2026$15.00Anthropic · Sep 3, 2026
Context windowMaximum documented tokens262K1,000K
Model facts checkedAug 28, 2026View model evidence →Sep 3, 2026View model evidence →

Token prices are the lowest available sourced USD rates; input and output may use different providers. Cost ranking estimates output spend on LiveBench, not a full request bill. Ranking methodology →

Available Benchmarks

All benchmark results →
No Protocol-Matched Benchmark Yet.Results appear here only when both models share the same benchmark version, metric, evaluation protocol, and evidence class.

Side-by-Side Facts

FieldQwen3.8-2.4T-A95BClaude Sonnet 4.6
DeveloperQwenAnthropic
FamilyQwen3 8 2 4t A95bClaude 4
ModelQwen3.8-2.4T-A95BClaude Sonnet 4.6
VersionQwen3.8-2.4T-A95BClaude Sonnet 4.6
Lifecycleactiveactive
ReleasedUnknown2026-02-17
Knowledge cutoffUnknown2025-08-01
Input modalitiesTextText, Image
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window262K1,000K
Total parameters2.4TUnknown
Active parameters95BUnknown
LicenseotherUnknown
Open weightsYesNo
API availableYesYes
Self-hostableYesNo
Provider accessDeepinfra (Standard), Fireworks Ai (Standard), Hugging Face (Standard), Openrouter (Standard), Together Ai (Standard)Anthropic (Standard), Deepinfra (Standard)
Capabilitieschat, generation, reasoning, toolschat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools

Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningtools
Serving providers5
Canonical IDQwen/Qwen3.8-2.4T-A95B

Claude Sonnet 4.6 Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningstructured outputstools
Serving providers2
Canonical IDanthropic/claude-sonnet-4-6

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs Claude Sonnet 4.6 FAQs

Is Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B or Claude Sonnet 4.6 better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B and Claude Sonnet 4.6, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B or Claude Sonnet 4.6?+

Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is $2.00 and Claude Sonnet 4.6 is $3.00 per million tokens, so Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is cheaper on this metric. Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is $6.00 and Claude Sonnet 4.6 is $15.00 per million tokens, so Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is cheaper on this metric.

Which has a larger context window, Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B or Claude Sonnet 4.6?+

Claude Sonnet 4.6 has the larger sourced context window. Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B supports 262K and Claude Sonnet 4.6 supports 1,000K.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B or Claude Sonnet 4.6?+

There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.

Can Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B or Claude Sonnet 4.6 be self-hosted?+

Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is open weight; Claude Sonnet 4.6 is not marked open weight.

Can Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B and Claude Sonnet 4.6 understand images?+

Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is not documented with image input; Claude Sonnet 4.6 is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.

Which can generate longer answers, Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B or Claude Sonnet 4.6?+

Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is — and Claude Sonnet 4.6 is 128K.

Do Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B and Claude Sonnet 4.6 support reasoning and tool use?+

Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B: reasoning and tool calling. Claude Sonnet 4.6: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B or Claude Sonnet 4.6?+

Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B has 5 sourced provider routes; Claude Sonnet 4.6 has 2, so Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B or Claude Sonnet 4.6?+

There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.

Send Feedback