Model decision surface
Compare AI models
Start with Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite and Qwen3.8 Max (0902), or choose any two current ranked language models. Compare capability evidence, price, context, provider availability, and weight access without pretending one field decides every use case.
Current public data
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite vs Qwen3.8 Max (0902)
Live dataset updated 9/9/2026, 8:46:14 PM UTC
Open 1200×630 evidence receipt| Field | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | |
|---|---|---|
| ModelCap position | #30 | #32 |
| Index score | 67.1 | 66.6 |
| Evidence | Measured5 public benchmark observations across 5 boards | Estimatedpublisher-corpus-prior over 182 held-out anchors (23%); opens from measured predecessor qwen/qwen3.7-max (78%); shrunk 4.9 toward the measured corpus |
| Input / 1M | $0.30 | $2.00 |
| Output / 1M | $2.50 | $6.00 |
| Pricing status | fresh | fresh |
| Context | 1M | 1M |
| Providers | 2 | 1 |
| Weight access | API only | API only |
Decision facts
- Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite is #30; Qwen3.8 Max (0902) is #32 on the same current language board.
- Index scores are 67.1 for Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite and 66.6 for Qwen3.8 Max (0902). Their published uncertainty intervals overlap, so the rank difference alone does not establish a reliable capability advantage for your workload.
- Evidence differs: Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite is Measured; Qwen3.8 Max (0902) is Estimated.
- Listed output price per 1M tokens is $2.50 for Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite and $6.00 for Qwen3.8 Max (0902). For 1,000 requests with 2,000 input and 500 output tokens each (2M input + 0.5M output), the listed-rate estimate is $1.85 for Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite versus $7.00 for Qwen3.8 Max (0902). Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite costs 73.6% less in this scenario. This excludes caching, batch discounts, prompt-length tiers, tool charges and retries; verify the selected endpoint before budgeting.
- Published context is 1,048,576 tokens for Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite and 1,000,000 for Qwen3.8 Max (0902).
- ModelCap currently lists 2 providers for Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite and 1 for Qwen3.8 Max (0902).
These are separate published fields, not a synthetic winner. ModelCap does not collapse price, access, context, and capability evidence into a hidden recommendation score.
Popular comparisons
- Muse Spark 1.3 vs GPT-6 Astra#2 vs #1 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs GPT-6 Astra#3 vs #1 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Muse Spark 1.3#3 vs #2 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Opus 5 vs GPT-6 Astra#4 vs #1 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Opus 5 vs Muse Spark 1.3#4 vs #2 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Claude Opus 5#3 vs #4 on the ModelCap Index
- GPT-5.6 Sol vs GPT-6 Astra#5 vs #1 on the ModelCap Index
- Muse Spark 1.3 vs GPT-5.6 Sol#2 vs #5 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs GPT-5.6 Sol#3 vs #5 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Opus 5 vs GPT-5.6 Sol#4 vs #5 on the ModelCap Index
- Kimi K3 vs GPT-6 Astra#6 vs #1 on the ModelCap Index
- Muse Spark 1.3 vs Kimi K3#2 vs #6 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Kimi K3#3 vs #6 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Opus 5 vs Kimi K3#4 vs #6 on the ModelCap Index
- Kimi K3 vs GPT-5.6 Sol#6 vs #5 on the ModelCap Index
- Gemini 3.8 Flash vs GPT-6 Astra#7 vs #1 on the ModelCap Index
- Gemini 3.8 Flash vs Muse Spark 1.3#7 vs #2 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Gemini 3.8 Flash#3 vs #7 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Opus 5 vs Gemini 3.8 Flash#4 vs #7 on the ModelCap Index
- Gemini 3.8 Flash vs GPT-5.6 Sol#7 vs #5 on the ModelCap Index
- Gemini 3.8 Flash vs Kimi K3#7 vs #6 on the ModelCap Index
- GPT-6 Astra vs GLM 5.3#1 vs #8 on the ModelCap Index
- Muse Spark 1.3 vs GLM 5.3#2 vs #8 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs GLM 5.3#3 vs #8 on the ModelCap Index
Each comparison page is a permanent, shareable URL with the same live figures as this tool: ModelCap Index position, API pricing, context window, provider count, weight access and every shared benchmark board.