Navigate
Advertise here

Compared models

Qwen3.8 27B (low) vs Qwen3.8 Flash Next (low) vs Qwen3.8 27B (high) vs Qwen3.8 Flash Next (xhigh) benchmark comparison: Qwen3.8 27B (high) leads on Score with 8.7. Qwen3.8 27B (low) leads on Reliability with 10.0. Qwen3.8 Flash Next (low) has the lowest Total Cost at ~$0.045. Qwen3.8 Flash Next (low) is fastest at 23.66s.

Last updated at: 2026-10-05

Compared models

Rank
#121
Total Output Tokens
209,143
Response Time (avg)
46.60s
Total Cost
~$0.089
Rank
#96
Total Output Tokens
135,295
Response Time (avg)
23.66s
Total Cost
~$0.045
Rank
#55
Total Output Tokens
677,080
Response Time (avg)
166.34s
Total Cost
~$0.298
Rank
#154
Total Output Tokens
621,056
Response Time (avg)
102.66s
Total Cost
~$0.195
Recommended model Qwen3.8 Flash Next (low)

Its score stays close to the best score here (8.0 vs 8.7), while costing about 4.3x less than the other models in this comparison.

Detailed comparison

Metric Qwen3.8 27B Qwen3.8 27B low Release: 2026-08-14 Free Available Qwen3.8 Flash Next Qwen3.8 Flash Next low Release: 2026-10-04 Qwen3.8 27B Qwen3.8 27B high Release: 2026-08-14 Free Available Qwen3.8 Flash Next Qwen3.8 Flash Next xhigh Release: 2026-10-04
Score 7.6 8.0 8.7 7.1
Rank #121 #96 #55 #154
Reliability 10.0 10.0 9.7 9.9
Consistency 9.7 8.0 9.2 7.9
Attempts 69/69 69/69 69/69 69/69
Tests Correct
Attempt pass rate 68.1% 79.7% 78.3% 72.5%
Flaky tests 1 6 2 6
Total Runs 69 69 69 69
Cost per result ~0.589 ~0.299 ~1.751 ~1.390
Total Cost ~$0.089 ~$0.045 ~$0.298 ~$0.195
Input Price N/A N/A N/A N/A
Output Price N/A N/A N/A N/A
Cache Read Price N/A N/A N/A N/A
Cache Write Price N/A N/A N/A N/A
Total Input Tokens 315,290 342,163 348,967 301,749
Output Tokens 1,607 1,518 1,005 1,033
Reasoning Tokens 207,536 133,777 676,075 620,023
Response Time (avg) 46.60s 23.66s 166.34s 102.66s
Response Time (max) 376.04s 166.72s 640.85s 674.08s
Response Time (total) 1071.83s 544.16s 3825.81s 2361.10s
Parameters 27.3B 180B total (6B active) 27.3B 180B total (6B active)
Availability Weights available Weights available Weights available Weights available

Cache prices apply to input tokens. Reads reuse cached prompts; writes store them and can cost extra. Output tokens use the output price.

Model generation showcase

Hamster playing table tennis

Prompt: Create a detailed SVG illustration of a hamster playing table tennis.

#121 Qwen3.8 27B

low
Cost
~$0.003
Time
92.8s
Tokens
6,902 tok

#96 Qwen3.8 Flash Next

low
Cost
~$0.002
Time
47.2s
Tokens
5,270 tok

#55 Qwen3.8 27B

high
Cost
~$0.008
Time
270.1s
Tokens
18,963 tok

#154 Qwen3.8 Flash Next

xhigh
Cost
~$0.010
Time
333.1s
Tokens
30,654 tok

Top Models by Score

Score vs Total Cost

Response Time (avg)

Score vs Response Time (avg)

Total Output Tokens

Score vs Total Output Tokens

Category Breakdown

Coding Score Consistency Attempt pass rate Flaky tests Tests Correct Response Time (avg) Input Tokens Output Tokens Reasoning Tokens
Qwen3.8 27B 7.7 10.0 66.7% 0 140.92s 8,127 585 86,694
Qwen3.8 Flash Next 10.0 10.0 100.0% 0 29.46s 8,127 397 24,147
Qwen3.8 27B 8.1 7.0 88.9% 1 248.62s 8,235 346 143,335
Qwen3.8 Flash Next 7.4 7.0 77.8% 1 192.20s 8,235 122 186,070

Quick Compare

Switch Comparison Pair

GPT-5.2mediumvsQwen3.8 27BhighFree AvailableQwen3.8 27BhighFree AvailablevsMiMo-V2.6-PromediumSeed 2.1 TurbomediumvsQwen3.8 27BhighFree AvailableGemini 3.8 FlashmediumvsQwen3.8 Flash NextlowGPT-5.4 NanomediumvsQwen3.8 Flash NextlowGPT-6 SollowvsQwen3.8 27BhighFree AvailableQwen3.8 27BlowFree AvailablevsSpace Bunny AlphahighQwen3.8 27BlowFree AvailablevsGLM 5.1mediumQwen3.8 Flash NextlowvsGLM 5.3 FlashXmaxQwen3.8 Flash NextxhighvsGLM 5.3 FlashXmediumClaude Fable 5.1highvsQwen3.8 Flash NextlowNemotron 3 UltramediumFree AvailablevsQwen3.8 Flash Nextlow