Model Comparison
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
vs. Step 3.5 Flash
Comparing 2 AI models · 0 benchmarks · Alibaba, StepFun
Recommended Pick
StStep 3.5 Flash6 metric winsStrongest on: Input price, Output price, Blended price
Best Value
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
100.0 value score
55.8 reasoning / $0.23/1M
Lowest Price
Step 3.5 Flash
$0.10/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
55.8 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
73.1 coding index
Differences That Matter
Best value
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
Step 3.5 Flash is 1.5x cheaper on input tokens than Qwen3.8-Flash-Next.
Speed gap
Step 3.5 Flash generates about 3.0x as many tokens per second as Qwen3.8-Flash-Next.
Reasoning gap
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next leads Step 3.5 Flash by 29.8 points on reasoning.
Top-pick rationale
Step 3.5 Flash wins 6 measurable categories, including Input price, Output price, Blended price, Throughput.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Step 3.5 Flash
StepFun
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Secure AI Chat made in Europe
Processing terms vary by selected model. Review the current Privacy Policy and DPA before using sensitive data.
OpenAI-compatible inference
Choose from the current model catalog. Processing terms vary by selected model and service.
Full Comparison
| Metric | Al Qwen3.8-Flash-Next | Top Pick St Step 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.15/1M | $0.10/1M |
| Output Cost | $0.47/1M | $0.30/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.23/1M | $0.15/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Alibaba | StepFun |
| Release Date | Aug 26, 2026 | Feb 2, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 75.6 tok/s | 224.3 tok/s |
| TTFT | 2740ms | 1120ms |
| Latency | 29200ms | 10030ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 100.0 | 71.4 |
| Reasoning Score | 55.8 | 26.0 |
| Intelligence | 55.8 | 26.0 |
| Coding | 73.1 | — |
Key Takeaways
Step 3.5 Flash offers the best value at $0.10/1M,making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next has the strongest reasoning profile with a 55.8 reasoning score,combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next reaches a 73.1 coding index,making it the top choice for software development and code generation tasks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens,suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
Step 3.5 Flash
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
