Hunyuan Hy3 vs Qwen 3.8-Max

Tencent · China  |  Alibaba · China · Updated June 2026

Quick verdict

Pick Hunyuan Hy3 for frontier-level reported reasoning and science (gpqa diamond 90.4) at low active-parameter cost or runs a 295b model at the cost of a 21b — only 21b parameters active per token. Pick Qwen 3.8-Max for near-frontier quality at value pricing — artificial analysis intelligence index 58 or large 1m-token context with multimodal input (text, image, video). Choose Hunyuan Hy3 if you need self-hosting or data privacy; Qwen 3.8-Max if you want a managed API.

Hunyuan Hy3 (Tencent) and Qwen 3.8-Max (Alibaba) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. Hunyuan Hy3 is a 295B Apache-2.0 open MoE that reaches frontier reasoning quality while running at roughly 21B active-parameter cost. Qwen 3.8-Max is alibaba's flagship mixture-of-experts model — near-frontier on independent tests (AA Index 58) at a fraction of US-flagship pricing, with open weights promised but not yet shipped. They diverge most on price, context window and open vs. closed weights — each quantified below from the models' real specs.

Key differences at a glance

Side-by-side specs

SpecHunyuan Hy3Qwen 3.8-Max
ProviderTencent (China) Alibaba (China)
ReleasedJuly 6, 2026 August 3, 2026
Context window256K (~384 pages) 1M (~1,573 pages)
Price (in/out)Open weight (self-host / free) $2/$6 per 1M tokens
Open weight?Yes — self-hostable No — API only
Modalitiestext, code text, image, video, code
SWE-Bench VerifiedNot published Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1MNot published Not published

Who wins what

Frontier-level reported reasoning and science (GPQA Diamond 90.4) at low active-parameter cost

Hunyuan Hy3

Qwen 3.8-Max is comparatively weak here — active-parameter count is not officially disclosed by Alibaba

Runs a 295B model at the cost of a 21B — only 21B parameters active per token

Hunyuan Hy3

A 295B Apache-2.0 open MoE that reaches frontier reasoning quality while running at roughly 21B active-parameter cost — and its weights are open while Qwen 3.8-Max is API-only.

Clean, unrestricted Apache-2.0 license with no geographic carve-out

Hunyuan Hy3

Hunyuan Hy3 lists clean, unrestricted Apache-2.0 license with no geographic carve-out among its strengths; Qwen 3.8-Max does not.

Near-frontier quality at value pricing — Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index 58

Qwen 3.8-Max

Hunyuan Hy3 is comparatively weak here — benchmarks are largely self-reported, and the ultra-low hosted pricing is a limited promotion

Large 1M-token context with multimodal input (text, image, video)

Qwen 3.8-Max

Its 1M window holds about 4.1× more than Hunyuan Hy3's 256K in a single prompt.

Mixture-of-experts design: ~2.4T total parameters (Alibaba-reported), a fraction active per token

Qwen 3.8-Max

Alibaba's flagship mixture-of-experts model — near-frontier on independent tests (AA Index 58) at a fraction of US-flagship pricing, with open weights promised but not yet shipped — and it carries the larger 1M context.

Lowest cost at scale

Hunyuan Hy3

Its weights are open, so at volume you pay for your own hardware instead of Qwen 3.8-Max's $2/$6 per 1M tokens.

Largest single-prompt input

Qwen 3.8-Max

Its 1M window is about 4.1× larger than Hunyuan Hy3's 256K, fitting roughly 1,573 pages in one prompt.

Which should you pick?

A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume

Hunyuan Hy3

At Open weight (self-host / free) it undercuts Qwen 3.8-Max, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.

Someone analysing very long documents or codebases

Qwen 3.8-Max

Larger 1M window fits more in one prompt.

A team with data-privacy or self-hosting needs

Hunyuan Hy3

Open weights let you run it on your own hardware; Qwen 3.8-Max is API-only.

Anyone whose priority is frontier-level reported reasoning and science (gpqa diamond 90.4) at low active-parameter cost

Hunyuan Hy3

It is specifically built for that.

Anyone whose priority is near-frontier quality at value pricing — artificial analysis intelligence index 58

Qwen 3.8-Max

That is its strongest area.

Hunyuan Hy3: where it fits

A 295B Apache-2.0 open MoE that reaches frontier reasoning quality while running at roughly 21B active-parameter cost. Released July 6, 2026 by Tencent, it is built for frontier-level reported reasoning and science (GPQA Diamond 90.4) at low active-parameter cost, runs a 295B model at the cost of a 21B — only 21B parameters active per token, clean, unrestricted Apache-2.0 license with no geographic carve-out, and broad day-one ecosystem support plus an FP8 checkpoint.

Its trade-offs are real: benchmarks are largely self-reported, and the ultra-low hosted pricing is a limited promotion, and the hosted API is China-jurisdiction, and self-hosting a 295B MoE still needs serious hardware. As an open-weight model, its running cost is your own hardware rather than a per-token fee.

Qwen 3.8-Max: where it fits

Alibaba's flagship mixture-of-experts model — near-frontier on independent tests (AA Index 58) at a fraction of US-flagship pricing, with open weights promised but not yet shipped. Released August 3, 2026 by Alibaba, it is built for near-frontier quality at value pricing — Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index 58, large 1M-token context with multimodal input (text, image, video), mixture-of-experts design: ~2.4T total parameters (Alibaba-reported), a fraction active per token, and $2/$6 per million tokens — far below US flagships like Claude Opus 5 and GPT-5.6 Sol.

Its trade-offs: open weights were announced for release but had not shipped as of mid-August 2026 — a closed API for now, active-parameter count is not officially disclosed by Alibaba, flashier coding/agentic benchmarks (e.g. Terminal-Bench 86.6) are Alibaba's own, not independently reproduced, and trails the very top models (Opus 5, Fable 5, GPT-5.6 Sol) on independent tests. At $2 in / $6 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.

The bottom line for this matchup

The defining split here is open vs. closed. Hunyuan Hy3 gives you weights you control — self-host it, fine-tune it, keep data in-house, pay only for hardware. Qwen 3.8-Max gives you a managed, always-updated API with no infrastructure to run. Teams with GPUs, privacy requirements, or huge volume often favour the open model; teams that want zero ops and the latest capabilities favour the closed one. Capability is close enough that this operational question, not the benchmark, usually decides it.

Want both Hunyuan Hy3 and Qwen 3.8-Max without two subscriptions? LumiChats gives you these plus 40+ models under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day) — draft with one, cross-check with the other.

See pricing

Frequently asked questions

Is Hunyuan Hy3 or Qwen 3.8-Max better for coding?

Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for either model, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Hunyuan Hy3 leans toward frontier-level reported reasoning and science (gpqa diamond 90.4) at low active-parameter cost while Qwen 3.8-Max leans toward near-frontier quality at value pricing — artificial analysis intelligence index 58, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.

Which is cheaper, Hunyuan Hy3 or Qwen 3.8-Max?

Hunyuan Hy3 is open-weight, so self-hosting means no per-token fee (you pay for hardware instead), while Qwen 3.8-Max is API-metered at $2/$6 per 1M tokens. For most teams without GPUs, the API model is cheaper to start; at very high volume, self-hosting can win.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen 3.8-Max — 1M vs 256K, about 4.1× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.

Can I use both Hunyuan Hy3 and Qwen 3.8-Max together?

Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Hunyuan Hy3, Qwen 3.8-Max and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.

Which is newer, Hunyuan Hy3 or Qwen 3.8-Max?

Qwen 3.8-Max — released August 3, 2026, about 28 days after Hunyuan Hy3.

Related comparisons

Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.