The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

GPT-6.1 Terra vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

GPT-6.1 Terra and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next are closely matched at 47.6 and 47.8 on the LLM Stats Score.

OpenAI · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

GPT-6.1 Terra and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next are closely matched on the overall LLM Stats Score at 47.6 and 47.8.

In the 1 individual benchmarks reported for both models, GPT-6.1 Terra wins 1; 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 GPT-6.1 Terra

  • your work emphasizes agents — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 1 of 1 exact shared results
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Oct 2026

Choose Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

GPT-6.1 Terra
OpenAI
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
47.6
#37
47.8
#35
Reasoning
49.1
#18
48.2
#22
Coding
37.3
#30
33.5
#48
Agents
38.7
#11
32.9
#40
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
1 of 1
0 of 1
Input price
$1.00 / M
— / M
Output price
$5.00 / M
— / M
Context window
1,050,000
—

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
GPT-6.1 Terra
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Tool use
33.3#5
30.1#16
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

8 reported for GPT-6.1 Terra · 22 for Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

1 shared

GPT-6.1 Terra outperforms in 1 benchmarks (Agents' Last Exam), while Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is better at 0 benchmarks.

GPT-6.1 Terra significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Mon Nov 02 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only GPT-6.1 Terra specifies input context (1,050,000 tokens). Only GPT-6.1 Terra specifies output context (128,000 tokens).

OpenAI
GPT-6.1 Terra
Input1,050,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Mon Nov 02 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Both GPT-6.1 Terra and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next support multimodal inputs.

They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.

GPT-6.1 Terra

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

GPT-6.1 Terra is licensed under a proprietary license, 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.

GPT-6.1 Terra

Proprietary

Closed source

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

Qwen Community License 1.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

GPT-6.1 Terra was released on 2026-10-26, while Qwen3.8-Flash-Next was released on 2026-08-26.

GPT-6.1 Terra is 2 months newer than Qwen3.8-Flash-Next.

GPT-6.1 Terra

Oct 26, 2026

6 days ago

2mo newer
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

Aug 26, 2026

2 months ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

GPT-6.1 Terra has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2026-06-01, while Qwen3.8-Flash-Next's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm GPT-6.1 Terra's training data extends to 2026-06-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without Qwen3.8-Flash-Next's cutoff date.

GPT-6.1 Terra

Jun 2026

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

—

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against GPT-6.1 Terra and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

GPT-6.1 Terra
✓ Preferred
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about GPT-6.1 Terra vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next.

Which is better, GPT-6.1 Terra or Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?

GPT-6.1 Terra and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next are closely matched on the LLM Stats Score at 47.6 and 47.8. GPT-6.1 Terra is made by OpenAI 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 GPT-6.1 Terra compare to Qwen3.8-Flash-Next in benchmarks?

GPT-6.1 Terra scores HealthBench Consensus: 95.1%, HealthBench Professional: 62.7%, Agents' Last Exam: 60.0%, Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1: 58.3%, MentalHealthBench: 55.5%. 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 GPT-6.1 Terra and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?

GPT-6.1 Terra supports 1.1M 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 GPT-6.1 Terra and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (47.6 vs 47.8), licensing (Proprietary vs Qwen Community License 1.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes GPT-6.1 Terra and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?

GPT-6.1 Terra is developed by OpenAI and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.

Related comparisons