Laguna M.1 vs Qwen3.8 Max

Decision reading

Qwen3.8 Max has the higher public score, 71.76 versus 3.88, and the 90% score intervals do not overlap.

6 results are shared. Category rows resting on Estimated evidence or different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.

Model A

Laguna M.1

Poolside

3.88/100

Estimated · Public rank #250

90% interval 0.0–13.8

Model B

Qwen3.8 Max

Alibaba

71.76/100

Supported · Public rank #11

90% interval 68.1–75.4

Updated September 15, 2026. Rank says Qwen3.8 Max is ahead. Price, access, and your workload can each overturn that. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty.

Share or export

Share on X LinkedInSocial card CSV JSON

Which one for your work

Recommendations appear only when a shared evidence basis or an explicit operating constraint supports the call. Secondary and unsupported use cases stay disclosed below the initial list.

Coding work
Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks
Qwen3.8 Max
Qwen3.8 Max leads on the public coding lane, 60.8 to 29.7, with Supported evidence for both models and non-overlapping 90% intervals.
Confidence: stronger
Long documents
Prompts that approach the documented context limit
Qwen3.8 Max
Qwen3.8 Max has the larger documented context window.
Confidence: documented

Show secondary and unsupported calls

Agentic work
Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion
Not enough matched evidence
Laguna M.1 is scored on Estimated evidence for agentic, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like.
Confidence: limited
Chat turn cost
1K fresh input + 500 output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Confidence: listed-rates
Cache-heavy agent loop cost
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Confidence: listed-rates
Repository review cost
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Confidence: listed-rates

What is actually comparable

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.

4 Laguna M.1 only

6 Shared

54 Qwen3.8 Max only

Shared results: 6
Laguna M.1 only: 4
Qwen3.8 Max only: 54
Like-for-like categories: 1 / 8

2 categories rest on Estimated evidence or different evidence sets. Those rows remain visible for coverage context but do not name a winner.

Category results, on a stated basis

Each row shows the public-lane category score for both models: the BenchAlign lane for agentic, coding, and knowledge, and the weighted public rows elsewhere, with the same rank each model page reports. A row is like-for-like only when both scores rest on Supported evidence or the same weighted set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner.

Coding

Like-for-like

Laguna M.1: 29.7; Supported · #141/152
Qwen3.8 Max: 60.8; Supported · #20/152
Basis: BenchAlign lane · 6 vs 12 public rows
Reading: Qwen3.8 Max leads

Agentic

Directional only

Laguna M.1: 24.0; Estimated · #149/153
Qwen3.8 Max: 67.3; Supported · #9/153
Basis: BenchAlign lane · 2 vs 15 public rows
Reading: Directional only

Knowledge

Directional only

Laguna M.1: 18.6; Estimated · #182/183
Qwen3.8 Max: 68.8; Supported · #17/183
Basis: BenchAlign lane · 2 vs 6 public rows
Reading: Directional only

Reasoning

Not comparable

Laguna M.1: Not ranked
Qwen3.8 Max: 86.5; Unranked · 2 rankable rows
Basis: Provisional lane · 0 vs 2 weighted rows
Reading: Not comparable

Math

Not comparable

Laguna M.1: Not ranked
Qwen3.8 Max: Not ranked
Basis: Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading: Not comparable

Multilingual

Not comparable

Laguna M.1: Not ranked
Qwen3.8 Max: Not ranked
Basis: Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading: Not comparable

Multimodal

Not comparable

Laguna M.1: Not ranked
Qwen3.8 Max: 87.4; #5/48
Basis: Provisional lane · 0 vs 2 weighted rows
Reading: Not comparable

Instruction following

Not comparable

Laguna M.1: Not ranked
Qwen3.8 Max: 90.7; #18/123
Basis: Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
Reading: Not comparable

Category scores with the server-provided evidence basis for Laguna M.1 and Qwen3.8 Max
Category	Laguna M.1	Qwen3.8 Max	Basis	Reading
Coding	29.7Supported · #141/152	60.8Supported · #20/152	Like-for-likeBenchAlign lane · 6 vs 12 public rows	Qwen3.8 Max leads
Agentic	24.0Estimated · #149/153	67.3Supported · #9/153	Directional onlyBenchAlign lane · 2 vs 15 public rows	Directional only
Knowledge	18.6Estimated · #182/183	68.8Supported · #17/183	Directional onlyBenchAlign lane · 2 vs 6 public rows	Directional only
Reasoning	Not ranked	86.5Unranked · 2 rankable rows	Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 2 weighted rows	Not comparable
Math	Not ranked	Not ranked	Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows	Not comparable
Multilingual	Not ranked	Not ranked	Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows	Not comparable
Multimodal	Not ranked	87.4#5/48	Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 2 weighted rows	Not comparable
Instruction following	Not ranked	90.7#18/123	Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows	Not comparable

Ranks count the models scored in each category’s lane, so the agentic, coding, and knowledge denominators (BenchAlign) differ from the provisional-lane categories. Unranked scores sit on the lane’s scale but never name a winner. Like-for-like rows within 0.5 points read as a practical tie.

Shape of the matched evidence

Only shared public evidence is shown. Sparse evidence stays a ruled list rather than being closed into a radar shape.

Too few matched category axes support a radar. The ruled list below shows only shared benchmark results; positions use each benchmark’s normalized display scale when available.

LiveCodeBench (Vals)
Coding
Laguna M.1: 68.1%Qwen3.8 Max: 87.9%Normalized gap 19.8Laguna M.1 source Qwen3.8 Max source
MMLU-Pro (Vals)
Knowledge
Laguna M.1: 68.8%Qwen3.8 Max: 88.6%Normalized gap 19.8Laguna M.1 source Qwen3.8 Max source
SWE-bench Pro
Coding
Laguna M.1: 49.2%Qwen3.8 Max: 67.7%Normalized gap 18.5Laguna M.1 source Qwen3.8 Max source

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes turn per-token rates into comparable decisions. Each scenario states context fit and whether cached input had to fall back to the published list-input rate.

Chat turn

1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

Laguna M.1: API rate not published; Fits in one request
Qwen3.8 Max: API rate not published; Fits in one request

Laguna M.1 has no comparable published API token rate. Qwen3.8 Max has no comparable published API token rate.

Repository review

50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

Laguna M.1: API rate not published; Fits in one request
Qwen3.8 Max: API rate not published; Fits in one request

Laguna M.1 has no comparable published API token rate. Qwen3.8 Max has no comparable published API token rate.

Cache-heavy agent loop

200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

Laguna M.1: API rate not published; Fits in one request; Cached-input rate unavailable
Qwen3.8 Max: API rate not published; Fits in one request; Cached-input rate unavailable

Laguna M.1 has no comparable published API token rate. Qwen3.8 Max has no comparable published API token rate.

Specification differences

Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.

SpecificationLaguna M.1Qwen3.8 Max

Context window

Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.

Laguna M.1

256K

Qwen3.8 Max

Alibaba Cloud Model Studio pricing

API model ID

Laguna M.1

Not sourced

Qwen3.8 Max

qwen3.8-max

Alibaba Cloud Model Studio pricing

Cached-input rate

A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.

Laguna M.1

No comparable hosted API rate

Qwen3.8 Max

No comparable hosted API rate

Alibaba Cloud Model Studio pricing

Documented inputs

Laguna M.1

Not sourced

Qwen3.8 Max

Not sourced

Documented outputs

Laguna M.1

Not sourced

Qwen3.8 Max

Not sourced

Provider availability

Laguna M.1

Not sourced

Qwen3.8 Max

Not sourced

Reasoning profile

Laguna M.1

Reasoning

Qwen3.8 Max

Reasoning

Weight access

Laguna M.1

Proprietary

Qwen3.8 Max

Open Weight

License

Laguna M.1

Proprietary

Qwen3.8 Max

Open Weight

Release date

Laguna M.1

2026-04-28

Qwen3.8 Max

2026-08-03

If you already use one of these models

Deployment change: The models list different providers, so authentication, endpoint behavior, limits, and feature support may change.
Quality signal: Qwen3.8 Max has the higher public score, 71.76 versus 3.88, and the 90% score intervals do not overlap.
Workload cost: A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Context tradeoff: Qwen3.8 Max has the larger documented window (1M).

Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.

Benchmark evidence

The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.

Browse raw public benchmark evidence64 rows

Agentic

Terminal-Bench 2.0
Laguna M.145.8%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max—
Not directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)
Laguna M.134.1%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max67.4%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max leads this result
Terminal-Bench 2.1
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max86.6%
Source
Not directly comparable
CoWorkBench
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max74.8%
Source
Not directly comparable
JobBench
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max53.4%
Source
Not directly comparable
skillsBench
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max70.2%
Source
Not directly comparable
Agents' Last Exam
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max52.4%
Source
Not directly comparable
AutomationBench
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max27.3%
Source
Not directly comparable
Toolathlon-Verified
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max72.5%
Source
Not directly comparable
WideResearch
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max81.9%
Source
Not directly comparable
HLE w/ tools
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max56.2%
Source
Not directly comparable
OSWorld-Verified
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max86.1%
Source
Not directly comparable
OSWorld 2.0
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max19.4%
Source
Not directly comparable
WebArena-Verified
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max66.8%
Source
Not directly comparable
AndroidWorld
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max85.3%
Source
Not directly comparable
MobileWorld
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max77.8%
Source
Not directly comparable

Coding

SWE-bench Verified
Laguna M.174.6%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max—
Not directly comparable
SWE Multilingual
Laguna M.163.1%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max—
Not directly comparable
SWE-bench Pro
Laguna M.149.2%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max67.7%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max leads this result
Terminal-Bench 2.0
Laguna M.145.8%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max—
Not directly comparable
LiveCodeBench (Vals)
Laguna M.168.1%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max87.9%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max leads this result
SWE-bench (Vals)
Laguna M.157.6%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max85.6%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max leads this result
Terminal-Bench 2.1
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max86.6%
Source
Not directly comparable
DeepSWE
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max56.6%
Source
Not directly comparable
NL2Repo
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max55.9%
Source
Not directly comparable
FrontierSWE
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max73.5%
Source
Not directly comparable
MLS-Bench Lite
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max41.0%
Source
Not directly comparable
PaperBench
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max93.0%
Source
Not directly comparable
VulcanBench v3
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max81.2%
Source
Not directly comparable
OpenHarmony Bench
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max60.8%
Source
Not directly comparable
FrontierSWE v2
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max15.8%
Source
Not directly comparable

Reasoning

MRCRv2
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max92.9%
Source
Not directly comparable
LongBench v2
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max66.3%
Source
Not directly comparable

Knowledge

GPQA Diamond (Vals)
Laguna M.127.0%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max93.7%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max leads this result
MMLU-Pro (Vals)
Laguna M.168.8%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max88.6%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max leads this result
GPQA
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max92.6%
Source
Not directly comparable
GPQA-D
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max92.6%
Source
Not directly comparable
HLE
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max43.6%
Source
Not directly comparable
HLE w/o tools
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max43.6%
Source
Not directly comparable

Multimodal

MMMU-Pro
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max82.3%
Source
Not directly comparable
MathVision
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max95.2%
Source
Not directly comparable
MathVision w/ Python
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max97.7%
Source
Not directly comparable
BabyVision
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max82.0%
Source
Not directly comparable
BabyVision w/ Python
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max91.3%
Source
Not directly comparable
ZeroBench
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max24.0%
Source
Not directly comparable
ZeroBench w/ Python
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max49.0%
Source
Not directly comparable
MedXpertQA (MM)
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max80.4%
Source
Not directly comparable
ScreenSpot Pro
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max84.5%
Source
Not directly comparable
Vision2Web
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max69.0%
Source
Not directly comparable
CharXiv w/o tools
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max88.4%
Source
Not directly comparable
CharXiv
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max93.5%
Source
Not directly comparable
OmniDocBench 1.5
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max92.1%
Source
Not directly comparable
OCRBench V2
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max74.2%
Source
Not directly comparable
CC-OCR
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max79.6%
Source
Not directly comparable
RealWorldQA
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max88.0%
Source
Not directly comparable
ERQA
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max77.8%
Source
Not directly comparable
SimpleVQA
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max75.0%
Source
Not directly comparable
PerceptionBench
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max63.5%
Source
Not directly comparable
Video-MME (with subtitle)
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max90.4%
Source
Not directly comparable
VideoMMMU
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max88.7%
Source
Not directly comparable
MMVU
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max82.4%
Source
Not directly comparable
MLVU (M-Avg)
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max90.8%
Source
Not directly comparable
LVBench
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max81.8%
Source
Not directly comparable

Instruction following

IFBench
Laguna M.1—
Qwen3.8 Max82.8%
Source
Not directly comparable

Questions

Which is better, Laguna M.1 or Qwen3.8 Max?

Qwen3.8 Max has the higher public score, 71.76 versus 3.88, and the 90% score intervals do not overlap. That is the clearest overall quality signal in the current public data.

Which is better for coding, Laguna M.1 or Qwen3.8 Max?

Qwen3.8 Max leads the public coding lane, 60.8 to 29.7, with Supported evidence for both models and non-overlapping 90% intervals.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Laguna M.1 or Qwen3.8 Max?

Qwen3.8 Max scores higher for agentic tasks on the public lane, 67.3 to 24. Laguna M.1 is scored on Estimated evidence for agentic tasks, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like. BenchLM does not name a winner for agentic tasks from a directional reading; read the shared benchmark rows directly and test the models on the same task set.

Which costs less, Laguna M.1 or Qwen3.8 Max?

Both models do not have comparable published API token rates, so this page does not name a universal price winner.

Which has the larger context window, Laguna M.1 or Qwen3.8 Max?

Qwen3.8 Max has the larger documented context window: 1M, compared with 256K.

Related comparisons

Compare API pricing Read the methodology Open the model selector

Last updated September 15, 2026

Watch Laguna M.1 vs Qwen3.8 Max

One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.

Read a sample issue

Join 2,000+ readers.

Laguna M.1 vs Qwen3.8 Max

Which one for your work

Coding work

Long documents

Agentic work

Chat turn cost

Cache-heavy agent loop cost

Repository review cost

What is actually comparable

Category results, on a stated basis

Coding

Agentic

Knowledge

Reasoning

Math

Multilingual

Multimodal

Instruction following

Shape of the matched evidence

What each workload costs

Chat turn

Repository review

Cache-heavy agent loop

Specification differences

Context window

API model ID

Cached-input rate

Documented inputs

Documented outputs

Provider availability

Reasoning profile

Weight access

License

Release date

Benchmark evidence

Agentic

Coding

Reasoning

Knowledge

Multimodal

Instruction following

Questions

Which is better, Laguna M.1 or Qwen3.8 Max?

Which is better for coding, Laguna M.1 or Qwen3.8 Max?

Which is better for agentic tasks, Laguna M.1 or Qwen3.8 Max?

Which costs less, Laguna M.1 or Qwen3.8 Max?

Which has the larger context window, Laguna M.1 or Qwen3.8 Max?

Related comparisons

Watch Laguna M.1 vs Qwen3.8 Max