Compare / Qwen3-8B vs Nova 2 Lite

Qwen3-8B vs Nova 2 Lite

Which is cheaper, which is more capable, and which does better at each kind of work, from 22 results on 4 sources that measured both models.

AlibabaQwen3-8B Released 28 Apr 2025 · $0.12 in · $0.46 out
AmazonNova 2 Lite Released 29 Oct 2025 · $0.30 in · $2.50 out
Qwen3-8B wins 12Nova 2 Lite wins 10

Of the 22 results both models have, the better value on each. Results whose reported ranges overlap are too close to call.

Results as of 13 October 2026 (catalogue release 2026-10-13-2e2420e3c5cc). See also Alibaba vs Amazon, every model from both labs.

Qwen3-8B or Nova 2 Lite? The short answer

Pick Nova 2 Lite if quality matters most: it scores higher (Intelligence Index 13.4 against 7.3). Pick Qwen3-8B if cost matters more: it costs 4.2 times less per token.

  • Qwen3-8B is cheaper: $0.20 against $0.85 per million tokens, 4.2 times less.
  • Nova 2 Lite scores higher on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index: 13.4 against 7.3.
  • Nova 2 Lite is newer: released 29 Oct 2025, against 28 Apr 2025 for Qwen3-8B.
  • On third-party benchmarks, on the results both models have: Qwen3-8B does better for writing and sticking to the facts; Nova 2 Lite for reasoning and knowledge.

Head to head

7.3
Intelligence Index
13.4
$0.20
Price per million tokens, blendedlower is better
$0.85
131,072
Context window, tokens
1,000,000

Every fact side by side

Qwen3-8BNova 2 Lite
Price per million tokens$0.12 in · $0.46 out$0.30 in · $2.50 out
Blended (3 in : 1 out)$0.20$0.85
Cheapest host, blended–$0.85 (Amazon Bedrock)
Intelligence Index7.313.4
Spring Prompt overall––
Output speed, tokens a second–217
Context window131,072 tokens1,000,000 tokens
Released28 Apr 202529 Oct 2025 (newer)
WeightsOpenClosed
Developer based inChinathe US

Prices are the developer's list price where we have read it, otherwise the typical host on OpenRouter; see every model's price. Intelligence and speed from Artificial Analysis.

Which is better for what

Each model's rank among the models on sale today, for each kind of work, from our own benchmarks and licensed sources. Further right is better; the better rank is in green.

Agents and tool useMulti-step tasks with tools: support desks, coding agents, function calls 128 of 164 133 of 164
Reasoning and knowledgeHard questions across science, maths and general knowledge 169 of 198 116 of 198
WritingWhat people prefer in blind comparisons, and judged writing quality 159 of 188 169 of 188
Sticking to the factsSummarising without inventing things, and factual answers 6 of 152 73 of 152

Every shared result

Each model's best result on every measure both have, grouped by benchmark, with the setting that produced it. Under each measure, every model that benchmark has measured is a grey tick, best to the right, so you can see where the two sit in the field. The headline measures of each benchmark come first; the rest are under "Show all". Green marks the better value; where a source reports ranges that overlap, neither is marked.

MeasureQwen3-8BNova 2 Lite
Artificial Analysis reported by Artificial Analysis · 3 results
Artificial Analysis Intelligence Indexindex score, higher is better 211 · 138 of 243 measured 7.3thinking reasoning 13.4high reasoning
GPQA Diamond% of questions, higher is better 183 · 105 of 231 measured 58.9%thinking reasoning 81.1%high reasoning
Humanity's Last Exam% of questions, higher is better 220 · 142 of 242 measured 3.9%thinking reasoning 11.6%high reasoning
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) V4 reported by Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) V4 · 3 results
Overall accuracy · BFCL% correct, higher is better 30 · 58 of 81 measured 42.6%bfcl fc 27.1%bfcl fc
Irrelevance detection · BFCL% correct, higher is better 38 · 40 of 81 measured 82.3%bfcl prompt 82.1%bfcl fc
Memory · BFCL% correct, higher is better 40 · 73 of 81 measured 14.6%bfcl fc 2.4%bfcl fc
UGI Leaderboard reported by UGI Leaderboard · 3 results
Writing score · UGIscore out of 100, higher is better 162 · 190 of 230 measured 28.0no reasoning 23.5no reasoning
Requested-length error · UGI% off the requested word count, lower is better 83 · 200 of 230 measured 17.0%no reasoning 45.0%thinking reasoning
Style adherence · UGIscore from 0 to 1, higher is better 60 · 108 of 230 measured 0.36no reasoning 0.35no reasoning
Vectara Hallucination Leaderboard reported by Vectara Hallucination Leaderboard · 2 results
Hallucination rate · Vectara% of summaries, lower is better 9 · 10 of 104 measured 4.8% 5.1%
Answer rate · Vectara% of documents, higher is better 17 · 45 of 104 measured 99.9% 99.6%
Show all 22 results (11 more)
MeasureQwen3-8BNova 2 Lite
Artificial Analysis reported by Artificial Analysis · 6 results
Terminal-Bench 2.1% of tasks, higher is better 122 · 95 of 130 measured 2.2%thinking reasoning 16.1%high reasoning
Artificial Analysis Coding Indexindex score, higher is better 123 · 94 of 131 measured 9.0thinking reasoning 23.0high reasoning
IFBench% of instructions, higher is better 165 · 50 of 195 measured 33.5%thinking reasoning 70.7%high reasoning
Long-context reasoning (AA-LCR)% of questions, higher is better 222 · 139 of 233 measured 0.0%no reasoning 60.3%high reasoning
Terminal-Bench Hard% of tasks, higher is better 173 · 100 of 190 measured 2.3%no reasoning 17.4%medium reasoning
τ²-bench telecom% of tasks, higher is better 142 · 76 of 193 measured 27.8%thinking reasoning 75.7%medium reasoning
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) V4 reported by Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) V4 · 5 results
Multi-turn tasks · BFCL% correct, higher is better 23 · 71 of 81 measured 41.8%bfcl fc 2.1%bfcl fc
Relevance detection · BFCL% correct, higher is better 8 · 49 of 81 measured 93.8%bfcl fc 75.0%bfcl fc
Single-turn calls (curated) · BFCL% correct, higher is better 14 · 27 of 81 measured 88.6%bfcl prompt 87.0%bfcl fc
Single-turn calls (user-contributed) · BFCL% correct, higher is better 9 · 7 of 81 measured 80.5%bfcl fc 80.8%bfcl fc
Web search · BFCL% correct, higher is better 35 · 42 of 81 measured 13.5%bfcl prompt 5.0%bfcl fc

Quick answers

Is Qwen3-8B better than Nova 2 Lite?

Pick Nova 2 Lite if quality matters most: it scores higher (Intelligence Index 13.4 against 7.3). Pick Qwen3-8B if cost matters more: it costs 4.2 times less per token.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3-8B or Nova 2 Lite?

Qwen3-8B is cheaper: $0.20 against $0.85 per million tokens, 4.2 times less.

Which is better for agents and tool use, Qwen3-8B or Nova 2 Lite?

Qwen3-8B ranks 128 of 164 models on sale for multi-step tasks with tools: support desks, coding agents, function calls, against 133 for Nova 2 Lite.

Which is better for reasoning and knowledge, Qwen3-8B or Nova 2 Lite?

Nova 2 Lite ranks 116 of 198 models on sale for hard questions across science, maths and general knowledge, against 169 for Qwen3-8B.

Which is better for writing, Qwen3-8B or Nova 2 Lite?

Qwen3-8B ranks 159 of 188 models on sale for what people prefer in blind comparisons, and judged writing quality, against 169 for Nova 2 Lite.

Which is better for sticking to the facts, Qwen3-8B or Nova 2 Lite?

Qwen3-8B ranks 6 of 152 models on sale for summarising without inventing things, and factual answers, against 73 for Nova 2 Lite.

Which has the bigger context window, Qwen3-8B or Nova 2 Lite?

Nova 2 Lite: 1,000,000 tokens, against 131,072 for Qwen3-8B.

Run Qwen3-8B and Nova 2 Lite on your own prompt

Benchmarks aren't your data. Try both side by side in the playground, with the cost of every answer.