Skip to content
#01S+Oct 9, 2026Evidence B

Qwen3.8-Max

Alibaba · Undisclosed (MoE, trillion-scale total)

The flagship that changed who is #1

Released 9 October 2026 and the first model to take #1 on this tier list since it launched: composite 95.4, edging Doubao Seed 2.0 Pro by 0.2. It widens Qwen3.5’s document lead (97) while closing the gaps that used to trail Doubao — video timing (93) and GUI agents (95) — with 256K native context expandable to 1M.

TextImageVideoAudioGUINative

Last updated Oct 18, 2026Editorial scoring

Bottom line

On pure ceiling, Qwen3.8-Max is the October 2026 answer. Two caveats in our own methodology: 0.2 points is inside our same-band threshold, so this is not a blowout; and its evidence grade is only B — under two weeks old, with thin third-party reproduction and long-run stability data. Chase the ceiling and pick it; chase certainty and wait one evaluation cycle.

Eight-dimension breakdown

editorial mapping · 0–100
Perception97Document97Chart QA96Video93Agent95Generation90Chinese95Ecosystem968D
  • Qwen3.8-Max95.4
Visual perception & grounding20%
97
Document parsing & Chinese OCR18%
97
Chart & document reasoning14%
96
Video & long-horizon reasoning14%
93
GUI agents & tool use14%
95
Generation & editing6%
90
Chinese context & culture6%
95
Ecosystem, cost & availability8%
96

Weights: perception 20 / documents 18 / charts 14 / video 14 / agents 14 / generation 6 / Chinese 6 / ecosystem 8. Definitions and sources on the methodology page.

Public benchmarks

as reported, not converted
Benchmark / metricValueNote
SuperCLUE-VLM 2026-1091.8Official; not yet independently reproduced
OmniDocBench v1.50.089Edit distance, lower is better
上下文1M256K native, expandable

Public scores come from different versions and prompts and are not interchangeable with our composite; they are one evidence input.

Scenario mapping

five stress tests, one scale
ScenarioScoreObservation
Chinese receipt OCR97 · Best layout and field alignment today
Chart data extraction96 · Strong on multi-series and cross-page
30-min video QA92 · Gap closed; still just behind Doubao
Mobile GUI control95 · Cross-app planning now top tier
Chinese cultural context95 · Strong on official and academic text, weaker on memes

Strengths and limitations

Strengths

  • Documents and charts both 96+: cross-page tables, multi-figure comparison and unit conversion are the strongest publicly visible today.
  • 1M context with native vision reads a whole technical manual plus screenshots without chunking.
  • GUI agents jumped from 91 on Qwen3.5 to 95; cross-app long-horizon planning enters the top tier for the first time.

Limitations

  • At ¥18/1M output tokens it is one of the three priciest here; high-frequency image analysis gets a heavy bill.
  • Evidence grade B: under two weeks old, with no independent reproduction and no 30-day stability record.
  • Chinese everyday priors still trail Doubao; memes and regional dishes are a notch weaker zero-shot.

Price and real cost

List price

¥18/M tokens

≈ ¥18 / 1M output tokens. For 1,000 images at 1,024px, ~1,100 image tokens each and 300 output tokens, the monthly cost is about ¥10.9 (assuming input at 25% of output price).

Use your volume

About Qwen3.8-Max

Is Qwen3.8-Max open source?

Licence: Closed commercial API (smaller siblings open). No public weights; access is via vendor API or an on-prem licence.

How much does Qwen3.8-Max cost?

≈ ¥18 / 1M output tokens. It ranks #1 with a composite of 95.4. Real bills depend on resolution, tiling, caching and volume discounts.

What is Qwen3.8-Max best for?

Long-document, chart-dense enterprise knowledge bases; Whole-manual QA that needs 1M context; Cross-app GUI agents and automation flows。

Why does Qwen3.8-Max score 95.4?

The composite weights eight dimensions: perception 20%, documents 18%, charts 14%, video 14%, agents 14%, generation 6%, Chinese 6%, ecosystem 8%. Its strongest dimension is Visual perception & grounding; its weakest is Generation & editing.

Personal ranking · Not an official score

Every ranking, score and comparison on this page is an independent personal ranking, not an official score, and represents no vendor, institution or regulator. Scores are a subjective mapping of public evidence under our own weights — change the weights and the order changes. Disagree, or spotted a factual error? Contact the site owner: jizhi2024@foxmail.com — we check each report and log corrections in the changelog.