Beam 1.0 vs Qwen3.8 Max
Qwen3.8 Max leads the LLM Stats Score 50.7 to 44.6. Beam 1.0 is 4.1x cheaper per token.
Reflection AI · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
Qwen3.8 Max leads the overall LLM Stats Score 50.7 to 44.6, ranking #17 overall.
In the 8 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Qwen3.8 Max wins 6; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.
On price, Beam 1.0 is roughly 4.1x 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
- cost matters — it's about 4.1x cheaper per token
- 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 Qwen3.8 Max
- overall performance matters — it scores 50.7 and ranks #17 on LLM Stats
- your work emphasizes agents — it leads those capability indexes
- you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 6 of 8 exact shared results
At a glance
The differences that matter most.
Capability indexes
Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks
Individual benchmarks
22 reported for Beam 1.0 · 42 for Qwen3.8 Max
Beam 1.0 outperforms in 2 benchmarks (AutomationBench, LongBench v2), while Qwen3.8 Max is better at 6 benchmarks (DeepSWE 1.1, GPQA, Humanity's Last Exam, IFBench, SWE-Bench Pro, Terminal-Bench 2.1).
Qwen3.8 Max shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks.
Human preference
Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, Beam 1.0 ($0.40/1M tokens) is 4.1x cheaper than Qwen3.8 Max ($1.65/1M tokens).
For output processing, Beam 1.0 ($1.20/1M tokens) is 4.1x cheaper than Qwen3.8 Max ($4.95/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Qwen3.8 Max is more expensive than Beam 1.0.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Model Size
Parameter count comparison
Qwen3.8 Max has 1898.7B more parameters than Beam 1.0, making it 378.8% larger.
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
Beam 1.0 accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to Qwen3.8 Max's 256,000 tokens. Qwen3.8 Max can generate longer responses up to 256,000 tokens, while Beam 1.0 is limited to 131,072 tokens.
Input capabilities
Documented input modalities across available providers
Qwen3.8 Max supports multimodal inputs, whereas Beam 1.0 does not.
Qwen3.8 Max can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.
Beam 1.0
Qwen3.8 Max
License
Usage and distribution terms
Beam 1.0 is licensed under Apache 2.0, while Qwen3.8 Max uses Qwen3.8-Max License.
License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.
Apache 2.0
Open weights
Qwen3.8-Max License
Open weights
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
Beam 1.0 was released on 2026-10-16, while Qwen3.8 Max was released on 2026-08-02.
Beam 1.0 is 3 months newer than Qwen3.8 Max.
Oct 16, 2026
1 weeks ago
2mo newerAug 2, 2026
2 months ago
Knowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Beam 1.0 has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2026-06-30, while Qwen3.8 Max'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 Max's cutoff date.
Jun 2026
—
Provider Availability
Beam 1.0 is available from Together, Reflection AI. Qwen3.8 Max is available from DeepInfra, Fireworks, Novita, Together.
Beam 1.0
Qwen3.8 Max
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against Beam 1.0 and Qwen3.8 Max side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about Beam 1.0 vs Qwen3.8 Max.