Navigate
Advertise here

Qwen3.8 27B (low) vs GLM 5.2 (medium)

Qwen3.8 27B (low) leads on average score with 7.9 vs 7.8. Qwen3.8 27B (low) has the lower benchmark cost at ~$0.071 vs $0.151. GLM 5.2 (medium) is faster at 23.28s vs 39.11s, with pass rates of 68.2% vs 80.3%.

Last updated at: 2026-09-28

Compared models

Rank
#93
Total Output Tokens
169,329
Response Time (avg)
39.11s
Total Cost
~$0.071
Rank
#98
Total Output Tokens
61,761
Response Time (avg)
23.28s
Total Cost
$0.151
Recommended model Qwen3.8 27B (low)

It has the best score here (7.9), while costing about 2.1x less than GLM 5.2 (medium).

Detailed comparison

Metric Qwen3.8 27B Qwen3.8 27B low Release: 2026-08-14 GLM 5.2 GLM 5.2 medium Release: 2026-06-17
Score 7.9 7.8
Rank #93 #98
Reliability 10.0 9.5
Consistency 10.0 8.0
Attempts 66/66 63/66
Tests Correct
Attempt pass rate 68.2% 80.3%
Flaky tests 0 4
Total Runs 66 63
Cost per result ~0.473 2.159
Total Cost ~$0.071 $0.151
Input Price N/A $0.650 / 1M
Output Price N/A $2.042 / 1M
Total Input Tokens 99,705 37,199
Output Tokens 1,545 12,261
Reasoning Tokens 167,784 49,500
Response Time (avg) 39.11s 23.28s
Response Time (max) 376.04s 101.36s
Response Time (total) 860.51s 488.94s
Parameters 27.3B 744B total (40B active)
Availability Weights available Open source

Model generation showcase

Hamster playing table tennis

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

#93 Qwen3.8 27B

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

#98 GLM 5.2

medium
Cost
$0.041
Time
195.8s
Tokens
9,287 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
GLM 5.2 8.2 7.2 88.9% 1 40.96s 7,317 1,475 17,123

Quick Compare

Switch Comparison Pair