The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Gemini 3.5 Flash vs Qwen3.8-27B

Gemini 3.5 Flash and Qwen3.8-27B are closely matched at 43.6 and 46.1 on the LLM Stats Score.

Google · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Gemini 3.5 Flash and Qwen3.8-27B are closely matched on the overall LLM Stats Score at 43.6 and 46.1.

In the 5 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Qwen3.8-27B wins 4; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Gemini 3.5 Flash

  • you want predictable pricing at $1.50/M input and $9.00/M output

Choose Qwen3.8-27B

  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 4 of 5 exact shared results
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Aug 2026
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Gemini 3.5 Flash
Google
Qwen3.8-27B
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
43.6
#34
46.1
#24
Reasoning
44.4
#31
45.6
#24
Coding
33.8
#32
34.5
#29
Agents
31.5
#26
32.9
#24
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
1 of 5
4 of 5
Input price
$1.50 / M
— / M
Output price
$9.00 / M
— / M
Context window
1,048,576
—

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

4 shared
Index
Gemini 3.5 Flash
Qwen3.8-27B
Math
30.7#67
31.5#59
Vision
31.9#22
34.1#15
Tool use
31.5#10
25.0#30
Multimodal
33.0#14
37.7#4
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

16 reported for Gemini 3.5 Flash · 26 for Qwen3.8-27B

5 shared

Gemini 3.5 Flash outperforms in 1 benchmarks (Humanity's Last Exam), while Qwen3.8-27B is better at 4 benchmarks (CharXiv-R, DeepSWE 1.1, OSWorld-Verified, SWE-Bench Pro).

Qwen3.8-27B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Fri Aug 28 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Gemini 3.5 Flash specifies input context (1,048,576 tokens). Only Gemini 3.5 Flash specifies output context (65,536 tokens).

Google
Gemini 3.5 Flash
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output65,536 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.8-27B
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Fri Aug 28 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Both Gemini 3.5 Flash and Qwen3.8-27B support multimodal inputs.

They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.

Gemini 3.5 Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Qwen3.8-27B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Gemini 3.5 Flash is licensed under a proprietary license, while Qwen3.8-27B uses Apache 2.0.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Gemini 3.5 Flash

Proprietary

Closed source

Qwen3.8-27B

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Gemini 3.5 Flash was released on 2026-05-19, while Qwen3.8-27B was released on 2026-08-14.

Qwen3.8-27B is 3 months newer than Gemini 3.5 Flash.

Gemini 3.5 Flash

May 19, 2026

3 months ago

Qwen3.8-27B

Aug 14, 2026

2 weeks ago

2mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Gemini 3.5 Flash has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2026-01-31, while Qwen3.8-27B's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Gemini 3.5 Flash's training data extends to 2026-01-31, but cannot make a direct comparison without Qwen3.8-27B's cutoff date.

Gemini 3.5 Flash

Jan 2026

Qwen3.8-27B

—

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Gemini 3.5 Flash and Qwen3.8-27B side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Gemini 3.5 Flash
✓ Preferred
Qwen3.8-27B
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Gemini 3.5 Flash vs Qwen3.8-27B.

Which is better, Gemini 3.5 Flash or Qwen3.8-27B?

Gemini 3.5 Flash and Qwen3.8-27B are closely matched on the LLM Stats Score at 43.6 and 46.1. Gemini 3.5 Flash is made by Google and Qwen3.8-27B is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Gemini 3.5 Flash compare to Qwen3.8-27B in benchmarks?

Gemini 3.5 Flash scores CharXiv-R: 84.2%, MCP Atlas: 83.6%, MMMU-Pro: 83.6%, OSWorld-Verified: 78.4%, Terminal-Bench 2.0: 76.2%. Qwen3.8-27B scores MathVision: 94.6%, OmniDocBench 1.5: 91.1%, LiveCodeBench v6: 90.3%, CharXiv-R: 90.2%, GPQA: 89.2%.

What are the context window sizes for Gemini 3.5 Flash and Qwen3.8-27B?

Gemini 3.5 Flash supports 1.0M tokens and Qwen3.8-27B supports an unknown number of tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Gemini 3.5 Flash and Qwen3.8-27B?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (43.6 vs 46.1), licensing (Proprietary vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Gemini 3.5 Flash and Qwen3.8-27B?

Gemini 3.5 Flash is developed by Google and Qwen3.8-27B is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.

Related comparisons