Qwen 3.8 Flash Next 176B-A6B · Performance per Dollar

Qwen 3.8 Flash Next 176B-A6B — B200 vs Vera Rubin NVL72 Performance per Dollar

Cost per million tokens of B200 (NVIDIA Blackwell) versus Vera Rubin NVL72 (NVIDIA Vera Rubin) on Qwen 3.8 Flash Next 176B-A6B. Large-hyperscaler-volume ownership TCO normalized by total tokens — performance per dollar across LLM workloads. Pick the more cost-efficient SKU at every target interactivity level. Use the chart controls below to switch sequences, precisions, and metrics — same interactions as the main inference chart.

AgentX replays real coding-agent sessions rather than fixed-length prompts, so context grows turn over turn and most of each request is served from cache instead of being recomputed. That turns the comparison into a systems question: KV transfer between nodes, prefix-aware routing, and cache capacity all move the curve alongside raw chip throughput. Fixed-sequence workloads stay the clean baseline for kernel and silicon performance, so the two scenarios answer different questions about the same hardware. Learn more about AgentX →

Near the low end of the 53–259 tok/s/user interactivity band — at 104 tok/s/user — B200 runs $0.01 per million tokens on Qwen 3.8 Flash Next 176B-A6B while Vera Rubin NVL72 runs $0.00. Vera Rubin NVL72 is the cheaper choice by 77%.

On Qwen 3.8 Flash Next 176B-A6B at 156 tok/s/user, the per-million math comes out to $0.01 for B200 and $0.01 for Vera Rubin NVL72; Vera Rubin NVL72 delivers 116% more total tokens per dollar.

At 207 tok/s/user on Qwen 3.8 Flash Next 176B-A6B, B200 costs $0.03 per million tokens; Vera Rubin NVL72 costs $0.01. Vera Rubin NVL72 is 168% more cost-efficient at this operating point. (Numbers reflect the default agentic-traces · fp4 selection for this URL — table and chart below update if you change sequence, precision, or model in the controls.)

Chip pricing (owning hyperscaler): B200 $1.73/chip/hr · Vera Rubin NVL72 $3.61/chip/hr. Source: SemiAnalysis Market July 2026 Pricing Surveys & AI Cloud TCO Model.

View full latency + throughput comparison →

Qwen 3.8 Flash Next 176B-A6B: B200 versus Vera Rubin NVL72 cost per million tokens at matched interactivity levels
B200 versus Vera Rubin NVL72 cost per million tokens for this comparison's canonical default workload. Lower cost indicates better performance per dollar.
Interpolated from real benchmark data. Edit target interactivity values below to compare at different operating points.
Metric
Interactivity (tok/s/user)
Interactivity (tok/s/user)
Interactivity (tok/s/user)
Dollar per Million Tokens
B200:$0.009Vera Rubin NVL72:$0.005
B200:$0.014Vera Rubin NVL72:$0.006
B200:$0.026Vera Rubin NVL72:$0.010
Concurrency
B200:~12Vera Rubin NVL72:~272
B200:~7Vera Rubin NVL72:~265
B200:~2Vera Rubin NVL72:~173

Inference Performance

Agentic inference metrics from the AgentX scenario and fixed-sequence inference metrics across models, hardware configurations, and serving parameters.

Benchmark Config

No data available

No measurements to plot for this selection. Review the benchmark controls above or adjust quick filters.