GPT-6 Sol vs Qwen3.8 Max
Compare GPT-6 Sol and Qwen3.8 Max side-by-side.
Compare GPT-6 Sol vs Qwen3.8 Max live
Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.
These models don't share enough common tasks for a side-by-side demo. See the comparison table below for their capabilities.
Models in this comparison
GPT-6 Sol vs Qwen3.8 Max on Vision Evals
Qwen3.8 Max scores higher on 5 of the six Vision Evals tasks.
The widest gap is Data Extraction, where Qwen3.8 Max leads 87.6% to 80.4%.
Overall, GPT-6 Sol averages 80.7% (#10 of 57) against 83.9% (#6 of 57) for Qwen3.8 Max.
GPT-6 Sol is both cheaper ($0.0065 vs $0.0074 per sample) and faster (8.1s vs 17.3s per sample).
GPT-6 Sol vs Qwen3.8 Max Comparison Table
Evals updated September 22, 2026Pricing updated September 22, 2026
| Property | GPT-6 Sol | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | OpenAI | Qwen |
| Category | closed | closed |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Sep 2026 | Aug 2026 |
| Context Window | 1.1M | 984K |
| Parameters | undisclosed | 2.4T total, ~95B active |
| License | Proprietary | Apache 2.0 |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | |
| Chart Question Answering | ||
| Classification | Demo | |
| Document Question Answering | ||
| Image Tagging | ||
| Multi-Label Classification | ||
| Object Detection | Demo | |
| OCR | Demo | |
| Vision Language | ||
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | |
| Model Features | ||
| Foundation Vision | ||
| LLMs with Vision Capabilities | ||
| Multimodal Vision | ||
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 6 vision tasks, pooled at low effort | ||
| Overall | 80.7% | 83.9% |
| Avg cost / sample | $0.0065 | $0.0074 |
| Avg speed / sample | 8.15s | 17.25s |
| By task | ||
| Object Detection (low) | 73.6% ±0.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 72.9 to 74.2 | 76.7% ±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 76.5 to 77.1 |
| Object Detection (high) | 75.2% ±0.9, Mean of 3 runs, range 74.1 to 75.9 | 78.4% ±0.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.1 to 78.9 |
| Counting (low) | 74.8% ±2.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 71.6 to 77.0 | 81.1% ±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.4 to 82.4 |
| Counting (high) | 76.1% ±3.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 71.6 to 78.4 | 81.1% ±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.1 to 81.1 |
| Identification (low) | 91.7% ±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.5 to 93.8 | 88.5% ±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.5 to 90.6 |
| Identification (high) | 92.7% ±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.6 to 93.8 | 89.6% ±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.5 to 90.6 |
| OCR (low) | 91.7% ±0.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 91.3 to 92.1 | 93.3% ±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 92.8 to 93.9 |
| OCR (high) | 91.9% ±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 91.6 to 92.2 | 91.3% ±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.7 to 91.7 |
| Data Extraction (low) | 80.4% ±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 80.4 to 80.4 | 87.6% ±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.6 to 87.6 |
| Data Extraction (high) | 82.5% ±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.4 to 83.5 | 89.3% ±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 88.7 to 90.7 |
| Reasoning (low) | 72.2% ±1.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 70.9 to 74.2 | 75.9% ±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 73.5 to 77.5 |
| Reasoning (high) | 77.9% ±2.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 75.5 to 80.8 | 80.3% ±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.2 to 82.1 |
GPT-6 Sol vs Qwen3.8 Max: Overview
GPT-6 Sol is a proprietary multimodal reasoning model from OpenAI, released on September 22, 2026 alongside GPT-6 Luna as an efficiency-oriented tier of the GPT-6 family that began with GPT-6 Astra. OpenAI states that Sol and Luna are trained with methods similar to those used for Astra, carrying the same work on professional tasks, factuality, coding, computer use, and alignment into models that run faster. Sol accepts text and image input and returns text output, and OpenAI documents a context window of roughly one million tokens together with a knowledge cutoff of April 20, 2026.
The model targets complex coding and agentic workflows and exposes a configurable reasoning effort setting with levels of none, low, medium, high, xhigh, and max, which trades latency and token consumption against answer quality. OpenAI reports results including 33.2% on AutomationBench at xhigh effort and 56.4% on Agents' Last Exam at max effort, while its reported DeepSWE and OSWorld 2.0 figures of 68.8% and 64.4% fall below those of the earlier GPT-5.6 Sol. Its vision behavior covers image understanding tasks such as visual question answering, captioning, document and chart interpretation, and text recognition.
Qwen3.8 Max is the flagship tier of Alibaba's Qwen3.8 family, a sparse mixture-of-experts multimodal model with roughly 2.4 trillion total parameters of which about 95 billion activate per token, which keeps serving cost and latency well below what the total parameter count would imply. It builds on the architectural foundation established by Qwen3.5 and accepts text, images, video, and documents as input while producing text output. Reported context handling reaches close to one million tokens, with a maximum generation length of 131,072 tokens, so the model is aimed at long-horizon agentic work such as repository-scale coding, multi-step research, data analysis, and office document workflows.
For vision work the model performs image and video understanding, document and chart interpretation, text recognition inside images, and grounded visual question answering, and Alibaba reports gains concentrated in multimodal and agentic evaluation categories rather than general reasoning. Published figures include 86.6 on Terminal-Bench 2.1, 67.7 on SWE-bench Pro, 93.0 on PaperBench, 82.8 on IFBench, and 92.6 on GPQA Diamond. It is the first model in the Max tier of the Qwen line for which the team states weights will be released publicly, alongside a smaller Qwen3.8 27B checkpoint. No training or safety model card has been published.
Frequently Asked Questions
On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Qwen3.8 Max performed better. It scores higher on 5 of the six vision tasks and averages 83.9% (#6 of 57) against 80.7% (#10 of 57) for GPT-6 Sol. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.
No. On the Vision Evals Data Extraction benchmark at low effort, Qwen3.8 Max leads with 87.6% against 80.4%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.
GPT-6 Sol is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0065 per sample against $0.0074. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.
GPT-6 Sol is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 8.1s per inference against 17.3s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.