Skip to main content
Radar

Keep up with the models you depend on. Follow price changes, retirements, and API updates.Follow the models you depend on.

Follow model changes
BenchLM
Alibaba logo
Model A
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

Alibaba

56.84/100

Estimated · Public rank #84

90% interval 45.3–68.3

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next vs Solar Pro 4

Updated September 10, 2026. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty. They are not guarantees for a specific workload.

Upstage logo
Model B
Solar Pro 4

Upstage

—

Evidence status unavailable

90% interval unavailable

Decision reading

At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner.

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

Share or export

Share on XLinkedInSocial cardCSVJSON

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.

  • Long documents

    Prompts that approach the documented context limit

    Solar Pro 4

    Solar Pro 4 has the larger documented context window.

    Confidence: documented

Show secondary and unsupported calls

  • Coding work

    Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks

    Not enough matched evidence

    Solar Pro 4 is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.

    Confidence: limited

  • Agentic work

    Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion

    Not enough matched evidence

    Solar Pro 4 is not ranked on the public lane for agentic, so no winner is named for agentic.

    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.

Shared results
1
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next only
23
Solar Pro 4 only
9
Like-for-like categories
0 / 8

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.

Agentic

Not comparable
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
58.5
Estimated · #27/152
Solar Pro 4
Not ranked
Basis
BenchAlign lane · 6 vs 4 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Coding

Not comparable
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
57.9
Supported · #30/151
Solar Pro 4
Not ranked
Basis
BenchAlign lane · 5 vs 3 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Reasoning

Not comparable
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
75.8
Unranked · 2 rankable rows
Solar Pro 4
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Knowledge

Not comparable
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
55.5
Supported · #53/183
Solar Pro 4
Not ranked
Basis
BenchAlign lane · 4 vs 2 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Math

Not comparable
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Not ranked
Solar Pro 4
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multilingual

Not comparable
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Not ranked
Solar Pro 4
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multimodal

Not comparable
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
83.3
#7/48
Solar Pro 4
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 1 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Instruction following

Not comparable
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
88.0
#32/123
Solar Pro 4
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 1 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
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.

A shared-evidence shape is not available.

BenchLM does not draw a radar or infer missing axes when the matched evidence is too sparse.

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

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Fits in one request
Solar Pro 4
$0.0009
Fits in one request

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next has no comparable published API token rate.

Repository review

50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Fits in one request
Solar Pro 4
$0.0186
Fits in one request

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next has no comparable published API token rate.

Cache-heavy agent loop

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

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Fits in one request
Cached-input rate unavailable
Solar Pro 4
$0.03
Fits in one request

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next 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.

Documented inputs

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

Not sourced

Solar Pro 4

Not sourced

Documented outputs

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

Not sourced

Solar Pro 4

Not sourced

Provider availability

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

Not sourced

Solar Pro 4

Not sourced

Reasoning profile

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

Reasoning

Solar Pro 4

Reasoning

Weight access

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

Open Weight

Solar Pro 4

Proprietary

License

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

Open Weight

Solar Pro 4

Proprietary

Release date

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

2026-08-26

Solar Pro 4

2026-08-11

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
At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner.
Workload cost
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Context tradeoff
Solar Pro 4 has the larger documented window (512K).

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 evidence33 rows

Agentic

  • CoWorkBench

    Qwen3.8-Flash-Next73.9%
    Source
    Solar Pro 4—

    Not directly comparable

  • JobBench

    Qwen3.8-Flash-Next55.7%
    Source
    Solar Pro 4—

    Not directly comparable

  • Agents' Last Exam

    Qwen3.8-Flash-Next51.2%
    Source
    Solar Pro 4—

    Not directly comparable

  • Toolathlon-Verified

    Qwen3.8-Flash-Next73.5%
    Source
    Solar Pro 4—

    Not directly comparable

  • AndroidWorld

    Qwen3.8-Flash-Next84.5%
    Source
    Solar Pro 4—

    Not directly comparable

  • OSWorld 2.0

    Qwen3.8-Flash-Next19.4%
    Source
    Solar Pro 4—

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.1

    Qwen3.8-Flash-Next—
    Solar Pro 457.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • BrowseComp

    Qwen3.8-Flash-Next—
    Solar Pro 449.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MCP Atlas

    Qwen3.8-Flash-Next—
    Solar Pro 461.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • APEX-Agents

    Qwen3.8-Flash-Next—
    Solar Pro 418.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Coding

  • SWE-bench Pro

    Qwen3.8-Flash-Next62.5%
    Source
    Solar Pro 4—

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE Multilingual

    Qwen3.8-Flash-Next81%
    Source
    Solar Pro 4—

    Not directly comparable

  • NL2Repo

    Qwen3.8-Flash-Next48.1%
    Source
    Solar Pro 4—

    Not directly comparable

  • DeepSWE

    Qwen3.8-Flash-Next58.7%
    Source
    Solar Pro 4—

    Not directly comparable

  • LiveCodeBench v6

    Qwen3.8-Flash-Next91.9%
    Source
    Solar Pro 4—

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.1

    Qwen3.8-Flash-Next—
    Solar Pro 457.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE-bench Verified

    Qwen3.8-Flash-Next—
    Solar Pro 470.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • LiveCodeBench

    Qwen3.8-Flash-Next—
    Solar Pro 487.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Knowledge

  • GPQA

    Qwen3.8-Flash-Next91.7%
    Source
    Solar Pro 4—

    Not directly comparable

  • GPQA-D

    Qwen3.8-Flash-Next91.7%
    Source
    Solar Pro 489.0%
    Source

    Qwen3.8-Flash-Next leads this result

  • HLE

    Qwen3.8-Flash-Next35.9%
    Source
    Solar Pro 4—

    Not directly comparable

  • HLE w/o tools

    Qwen3.8-Flash-Next35.9%
    Source
    Solar Pro 4—

    Not directly comparable

  • MMLU-Pro

    Qwen3.8-Flash-Next—
    Solar Pro 486.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Math

  • AIME26

    Qwen3.8-Flash-Next—
    Solar Pro 495.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Multimodal

  • Vision2Web

    Qwen3.8-Flash-Next64.0%
    Source
    Solar Pro 4—

    Not directly comparable

  • ERQA

    Qwen3.8-Flash-Next72.3%
    Source
    Solar Pro 4—

    Not directly comparable

  • LVBench

    Qwen3.8-Flash-Next76.6%
    Source
    Solar Pro 4—

    Not directly comparable

  • RealWorldQA

    Qwen3.8-Flash-Next88.5%
    Source
    Solar Pro 4—

    Not directly comparable

  • MathVision

    Qwen3.8-Flash-Next90.6%
    Source
    Solar Pro 4—

    Not directly comparable

  • MathVision w/ Python

    Qwen3.8-Flash-Next95.7%
    Source
    Solar Pro 4—

    Not directly comparable

  • CharXiv w/o tools

    Qwen3.8-Flash-Next84.6%
    Source
    Solar Pro 4—

    Not directly comparable

  • CharXiv

    Qwen3.8-Flash-Next90.6%
    Source
    Solar Pro 4—

    Not directly comparable

Instruction following

  • IFBench

    Qwen3.8-Flash-Next81.3%
    Source
    Solar Pro 4—

    Not directly comparable

Frequently asked questions

Which is better, Qwen3.8-Flash-Next or Solar Pro 4?

At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner. The page therefore keeps the decision tied to the specific documented workload.

Which is better for coding, Qwen3.8-Flash-Next or Solar Pro 4?

Solar Pro 4 is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Qwen3.8-Flash-Next or Solar Pro 4?

Solar Pro 4 is not ranked on the public lane for agentic tasks, so no winner is named for agentic tasks.

Which costs less, Qwen3.8-Flash-Next or Solar Pro 4?

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, Qwen3.8-Flash-Next or Solar Pro 4?

Solar Pro 4 has the larger documented context window: 512K, compared with 262K.

Related comparisons

Compare API pricing Read the methodology Open the model selector

Last updated September 10, 2026

Watch Qwen3.8-Flash-Next vs Solar Pro 4

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

Read a sample issue

Join 2,000+ readers.