The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Beam 1.0 vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

Beam 1.0 and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next are closely matched at 44.6 and 48.1 on the LLM Stats Score.

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

Which is better?

Beam 1.0 and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next are closely matched on the overall LLM Stats Score at 44.6 and 48.1.

In the 6 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Qwen3.8-Flash-Next wins 4; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

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

Choose Beam 1.0

  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Oct 2026

Choose Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 4 of 6 exact shared results

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Beam 1.0
Reflection AI
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
44.6
#46
48.1
#31
Reasoning
45.5
#37
48.5
#20
Coding
33.7
#39
33.2
#42
Agents
28.8
#53
32.8
#35
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
2 of 6
4 of 6
Input price
$0.40 / M
— / M
Output price
$1.20 / M
— / M
Context window
1,048,576
—

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

3 shared
Index
Beam 1.0
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Math
35.1#45
32.8#62
Vision
15.9#105
34.0#18
Tool use
26.4#32
30.0#11
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

22 reported for Beam 1.0 · 22 for Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

6 shared

Beam 1.0 outperforms in 2 benchmarks (Humanity's Last Exam, SWE-Bench Pro), while Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is better at 4 benchmarks (DeepSWE 1.1, GPQA, IFBench, SWE-bench Multilingual).

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks.

Fri Oct 23 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

376.3B diff

Beam 1.0 has 376.3B more parameters than Qwen3.8-Flash-Next, making it 301.0% larger.

Reflection AI
Beam 1.0
501.3Bparameters
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
125.0Bparameters
501.3B
Beam 1.0
125.0B
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Beam 1.0 specifies input context (1,048,576 tokens). Only Beam 1.0 specifies output context (131,072 tokens).

Reflection AI
Beam 1.0
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Fri Oct 23 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next supports multimodal inputs, whereas Beam 1.0 does not.

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Beam 1.0

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Beam 1.0 is licensed under Apache 2.0, while Qwen3.8-Flash-Next uses Qwen Community License 1.0.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Beam 1.0

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

Qwen Community License 1.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Beam 1.0 was released on 2026-10-16, while Qwen3.8-Flash-Next was released on 2026-08-26.

Beam 1.0 is 2 months newer than Qwen3.8-Flash-Next.

Beam 1.0

Oct 16, 2026

6 days ago

1mo newer
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

Aug 26, 2026

1 months ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Beam 1.0 has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2026-06-30, while Qwen3.8-Flash-Next'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 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next's cutoff date.

Beam 1.0

Jun 2026

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

—

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Beam 1.0 and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Beam 1.0
✓ Preferred
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Beam 1.0 vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next.

Which is better, Beam 1.0 or Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?

Beam 1.0 and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next are closely matched on the LLM Stats Score at 44.6 and 48.1. Beam 1.0 is made by Reflection AI and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next 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 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next 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%. Qwen3.8-Flash-Next scores MathVision: 95.7%, LiveCodeBench v6: 91.9%, GPQA: 91.7%, CharXiv-R: 90.6%, RealWorldQA: 88.5%.

What are the context window sizes for Beam 1.0 and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?

Beam 1.0 supports 1.0M tokens and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next supports an unknown number of 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 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (44.6 vs 48.1), multimodal support (no vs yes), licensing (Apache 2.0 vs Qwen Community License 1.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Beam 1.0 and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?

Beam 1.0 is developed by Reflection AI and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.

Related comparisons