- Score
- 8.0 (+0.39 points)
- Total Cost (Current Price)
- $0.045 · 49.2% cheaper
- Response Time (avg)
- 23.66s · 49.2% faster
Summary
Qwen3.8 27B scores 7.6 on AI BENCHY and ranks #183. It has 10.0 reliability, a 68.1% pass rate, ~$0.089 total cost, and 46.60s average response time.
What makes Qwen3.8 27B unique: It stands out most in Combined, where it ranks #1, while Tool Calling is its weakest area at #16.
Recommended alternatives
We recommend choosing this model instead:
Model facts
Researched on 2026-08-14
- Parameters
- 27.3B
- Architecture
- Other
- Availability
- Weights available
- License
- Apache-2.0
Exact local Q4_K_M GGUF reports 27.3B parameters and a hybrid attention/SSM architecture through Ollama model details. Tested locally on an NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090.
7.6
Consistency
9.7
10.0
~$0.089
Total Output Tokens
209,143
Total Input Tokens
315,290
Estimated benchmark electricity cost
~$0.089
Flaky tests
1
Flaky tests had mixed outcomes across runs (at least one pass and one fail).
Hamster playing table tennis
Prompt: Create a detailed SVG illustration of a hamster playing table tennis.
#183 Qwen3.8 27B
low- Cost
- ~$0.003
- Time
- 92.8s
- Tokens
- 6,902 tok
Charts
Choose the first model, then click a second model to open a side-by-side page.
Top Models by Score
Score vs Total Cost
Response Time (avg)
Score vs Response Time (avg)
Total Output Tokens
Score vs Total Output Tokens
Quick Compare
Category Breakdown
| Category | Score | Consistency | Tests Correct |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | 6.1 | 3.1 | |
| Anti-AI Tricks | 10.0 | 10.0 | |
| Coding | 7.7 | 10.0 | |
| Combined | 10.0 | 10.0 | |
| Data parsing and extraction | 10.0 | 10.0 | |
| Domain specific | 5.3 | 10.0 | |
| General Intelligence | 5.0 | 10.0 | |
| Instructions following | 10.0 | 10.0 | |
| Puzzle Solving | 7.7 | 10.0 | |
| Tool Calling | 3.0 | 10.0 | |
| Trivia | 3.0 | 10.0 |