The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

LongCat-Flash-Lite vs Qwen3.8 Flash

Qwen3.8 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 49.6 to 19.0. LongCat-Flash-Lite is 1.3x cheaper per token.

Meituan · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Qwen3.8 Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 49.6 to 19.0, ranking #16 overall.

In the 2 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Qwen3.8 Flash wins 2; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

On price, LongCat-Flash-Lite is roughly 1.3x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Qwen3.8 Flash also accepts a larger context window (1,000,000 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 LongCat-Flash-Lite

  • cost matters — it's about 1.3x cheaper per token
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

Choose Qwen3.8 Flash

  • overall performance matters — it scores 49.6 and ranks #16 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 2 of 2 exact shared results
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,000,000 token context window
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Aug 2026

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

LongCat-Flash-Lite
Meituan
Qwen3.8 Flash
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
19.0
#194
49.6
#16
Reasoning
19.2
#187
49.2
#16
Coding
7.4
#173
36.6
#20
Agents
4.3
#143
35.5
#14
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
0 of 2
2 of 2
Input price
$0.10 / M
$0.15 / M
Output price
$0.40 / M
$0.47 / M
Context window
256,000
1,000,000

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

2 shared
Index
LongCat-Flash-Lite
Qwen3.8 Flash
Math
17.5#186
32.6#55
Tool use
10.7#115
31.6#10
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

13 reported for LongCat-Flash-Lite · 22 for Qwen3.8 Flash

2 shared

LongCat-Flash-Lite outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Qwen3.8 Flash is better at 2 benchmarks (GPQA, SWE-bench Multilingual).

Qwen3.8 Flash significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Mon Aug 31 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

LongCat-Flash-Lite costs less

For input processing, LongCat-Flash-Lite ($0.10/1M tokens) is 1.5x cheaper than Qwen3.8 Flash ($0.15/1M tokens).

For output processing, LongCat-Flash-Lite ($0.40/1M tokens) is 1.2x cheaper than Qwen3.8 Flash ($0.47/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Qwen3.8 Flash is more expensive than LongCat-Flash-Lite.*

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

Lowest available price from all providers
Mon Aug 31 2026 • llm-stats.com
Meituan
LongCat-Flash-Lite
Input tokens$0.10
Output tokens$0.40
Best providerMeituan
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.8 Flash
Input tokens$0.15
Output tokens$0.47
Best providerNovita
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

56.5B diff

Qwen3.8 Flash has 56.5B more parameters than LongCat-Flash-Lite, making it 82.5% larger.

Meituan
LongCat-Flash-Lite
68.5Bparameters
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.8 Flash
125.0Bparameters
68.5B
LongCat-Flash-Lite
125.0B
Qwen3.8 Flash

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Qwen3.8 Flash accepts 1,000,000 input tokens compared to LongCat-Flash-Lite's 256,000 tokens. Qwen3.8 Flash can generate longer responses up to 131,072 tokens, while LongCat-Flash-Lite is limited to 128,000 tokens.

Meituan
LongCat-Flash-Lite
Input256,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.8 Flash
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Mon Aug 31 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Qwen3.8 Flash supports multimodal inputs, whereas LongCat-Flash-Lite does not.

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

LongCat-Flash-Lite

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Qwen3.8 Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

LongCat-Flash-Lite is licensed under MIT, while Qwen3.8 Flash uses a proprietary license.

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

LongCat-Flash-Lite

MIT

Open weights

Qwen3.8 Flash

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

LongCat-Flash-Lite was released on 2026-02-05, while Qwen3.8 Flash was released on 2026-08-26.

Qwen3.8 Flash is 7 months newer than LongCat-Flash-Lite.

LongCat-Flash-Lite

Feb 5, 2026

6 months ago

Qwen3.8 Flash

Aug 26, 2026

4 days ago

6mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Provider Availability

LongCat-Flash-Lite is available from Meituan. Qwen3.8 Flash is available from Novita.

LongCat-Flash-Lite

meituan logo
Meituan
Input Price:Input: $0.10/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.40/1M

Qwen3.8 Flash

novita logo
Novita
Input Price:Input: $0.15/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.47/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

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

LongCat-Flash-Lite
✓ Preferred
Qwen3.8 Flash
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about LongCat-Flash-Lite vs Qwen3.8 Flash.

Which is better, LongCat-Flash-Lite or Qwen3.8 Flash?

Qwen3.8 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 49.6 to 19.0. LongCat-Flash-Lite is made by Meituan and Qwen3.8 Flash 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 LongCat-Flash-Lite compare to Qwen3.8 Flash in benchmarks?

LongCat-Flash-Lite scores MATH-500: 96.8%, MMLU: 85.5%, CMMLU: 82.5%, MMLU-Pro: 78.3%, Tau2 Retail: 73.1%. Qwen3.8 Flash scores MathVision: 95.7%, LiveCodeBench v6: 91.9%, GPQA: 91.7%, CharXiv-R: 90.6%, RealWorldQA: 88.5%.

Is LongCat-Flash-Lite cheaper than Qwen3.8 Flash?

LongCat-Flash-Lite is 1.5x cheaper for input tokens. LongCat-Flash-Lite costs $0.10/M input and $0.40/M output via meituan. Qwen3.8 Flash costs $0.15/M input and $0.47/M output via novita.

What are the context window sizes for LongCat-Flash-Lite and Qwen3.8 Flash?

LongCat-Flash-Lite supports 256K tokens and Qwen3.8 Flash supports 1.0M tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between LongCat-Flash-Lite and Qwen3.8 Flash?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (19.0 vs 49.6), context window (256K vs 1.0M), input pricing ($0.10 vs $0.15/M), multimodal support (no vs yes), licensing (MIT vs Proprietary). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes LongCat-Flash-Lite and Qwen3.8 Flash?

LongCat-Flash-Lite is developed by Meituan and Qwen3.8 Flash is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.

Related comparisons