The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Beam 1.0 vs Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking

Beam 1.0 leads the LLM Stats Score 44.6 to 23.4. Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking is 1.2x cheaper per token.

Reflection AI · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Beam 1.0 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 44.6 to 23.4, ranking #46 overall.

In the 1 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Beam 1.0 wins 1; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

On price, Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking is roughly 1.2x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Beam 1.0 also accepts a larger context window (1,048,576 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Beam 1.0

  • overall performance matters — it scores 44.6 and ranks #46 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 1 of 1 exact shared results
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,048,576 token context window
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Oct 2026

Choose Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking

  • cost matters — it's about 1.2x cheaper per token

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Beam 1.0
Reflection AI
Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
44.6
#46
23.4
#196
Reasoning
45.5
#37
24.1
#180
Agents
28.8
#53
12.1
#125
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
1 of 1
0 of 1
Input price
$0.40 / M
$0.15 / M
Output price
$1.20 / M
$1.50 / M
Context window
1,048,576
65,536

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

2 shared
Index
Beam 1.0
Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking
Math
35.1#45
26.4#110
Tool use
26.4#32
10.6#137
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

22 reported for Beam 1.0 · 23 for Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking

1 shared

Beam 1.0 outperforms in 1 benchmarks (GPQA), while Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking is better at 0 benchmarks.

Beam 1.0 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Thu Oct 22 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking costs less

For input processing, Beam 1.0 ($0.40/1M tokens) is 2.7x more expensive than Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking ($0.15/1M tokens).

For output processing, Beam 1.0 ($1.20/1M tokens) is 1.3x cheaper than Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking ($1.50/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Beam 1.0 is more expensive than Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Thu Oct 22 2026 • llm-stats.com
Reflection AI
Beam 1.0
Input tokens$0.40
Output tokens$1.20
Best providerTogether
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking
Input tokens$0.15
Output tokens$1.50
Best providerNovita
Notice missing or incorrect data?

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

421.3B diff

Beam 1.0 has 421.3B more parameters than Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking, making it 526.6% larger.

Reflection AI
Beam 1.0
501.3Bparameters
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking
80.0Bparameters
501.3B
Beam 1.0
80.0B
Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Beam 1.0 accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking's 65,536 tokens. Beam 1.0 can generate longer responses up to 131,072 tokens, while Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking is limited to 65,536 tokens.

Reflection AI
Beam 1.0
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking
Input65,536 tokens
Output65,536 tokens
Thu Oct 22 2026 • llm-stats.com

License

Usage and distribution terms

Both models are licensed under Apache 2.0.

Both models share the same licensing terms, providing consistent usage rights.

Beam 1.0

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Beam 1.0 was released on 2026-10-16, while Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking was released on 2025-09-10.

Beam 1.0 is 13 months newer than Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking.

Beam 1.0

Oct 16, 2026

4 days ago

1.1yr newer
Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking

Sep 10, 2025

1.1 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Beam 1.0 has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2026-06-30, while Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Beam 1.0's training data extends to 2026-06-30, but cannot make a direct comparison without Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking's cutoff date.

Beam 1.0

Jun 2026

Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking

—

Provider Availability

Beam 1.0 is available from Together, Reflection AI. Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking is available from Novita.

Beam 1.0

together logo
Together
Input Price:Input: $0.40/1MOutput Price:Output: $1.20/1M
reflection logo
Unknown Organization

Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking

novita logo
Novita
Input Price:Input: $0.15/1MOutput Price:Output: $1.50/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Beam 1.0 and Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Beam 1.0
✓ Preferred
Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Beam 1.0 vs Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking.

Which is better, Beam 1.0 or Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking?

Beam 1.0 leads the LLM Stats Score 44.6 to 23.4. Beam 1.0 is made by Reflection AI and Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Beam 1.0 compare to Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking in benchmarks?

Beam 1.0 scores AIME 2026: 97.7%, GPQA: 90.6%, LiveCodeBench: 88.3%, SWE-Bench Verified: 81.6%, MCP Atlas: 80.8%. Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking scores MMLU-Redux: 92.5%, IFEval: 88.9%, AIME 2025: 87.8%, WritingBench: 84.6%, MMLU-Pro: 82.7%.

Is Beam 1.0 cheaper than Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking?

Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking is 2.7x cheaper for input tokens. Beam 1.0 costs $0.40/M input and $1.20/M output via together. Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking costs $0.15/M input and $1.50/M output via novita.

What are the context window sizes for Beam 1.0 and Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking?

Beam 1.0 supports 1.0M tokens and Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking supports 66K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Beam 1.0 and Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (44.6 vs 23.4), context window (1.0M vs 66K), input pricing ($0.40 vs $0.15/M). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Beam 1.0 and Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking?

Beam 1.0 is developed by Reflection AI and Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.

Related comparisons