The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Gemini 3.8 Flash vs Qwen3.8-27B

Gemini 3.8 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 45.2.

Google · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Gemini 3.8 Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 45.2, ranking #15 overall.

In the 3 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Gemini 3.8 Flash wins 2; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

Gemini 3.8 Flash also accepts a larger context window (1,048,576 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

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

Choose Gemini 3.8 Flash

  • overall performance matters — it scores 51.0 and ranks #15 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes coding and agents — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 2 of 3 exact shared results
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,048,576 token context window
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

Choose Qwen3.8-27B

  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Gemini 3.8 Flash
Google
Qwen3.8-27B
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
51.0
#15
45.2
#30
Reasoning
46.9
#24
44.8
#31
Coding
39.3
#14
31.6
#39
Agents
35.8
#16
30.4
#31
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
2 of 3
1 of 3
Input price
$0.75 / M
— / M
Output price
$3.75 / M
— / M
Context window
1,048,576
262,144

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

3 shared
Index
Gemini 3.8 Flash
Qwen3.8-27B
Vision
33.8#15
33.1#18
Tool use
26.7#23
22.7#42
Multimodal
34.8#12
36.9#6
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

13 reported for Gemini 3.8 Flash · 26 for Qwen3.8-27B

3 shared

Gemini 3.8 Flash outperforms in 2 benchmarks (DeepSWE 1.1, Terminal-Bench 2.1), while Qwen3.8-27B is better at 1 benchmark (CharXiv-R).

Gemini 3.8 Flash shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks.

Mon Sep 07 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Gemini 3.8 Flash accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to Qwen3.8-27B's 262,144 tokens. Qwen3.8-27B can generate longer responses up to 131,072 tokens, while Gemini 3.8 Flash is limited to 65,536 tokens.

Google
Gemini 3.8 Flash
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output65,536 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.8-27B
Input262,144 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Mon Sep 07 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Both Gemini 3.8 Flash and Qwen3.8-27B support multimodal inputs.

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

Gemini 3.8 Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Qwen3.8-27B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Gemini 3.8 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 3.8 Flash

Proprietary

Closed source

Qwen3.8-27B

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Gemini 3.8 Flash was released on 2026-09-02, while Qwen3.8-27B was released on 2026-08-14.

Gemini 3.8 Flash is 1 month newer than Qwen3.8-27B.

Gemini 3.8 Flash

Sep 2, 2026

4 days ago

2w newer
Qwen3.8-27B

Aug 14, 2026

3 weeks ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Gemini 3.8 Flash has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2026-03-31, while Qwen3.8-27B's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Gemini 3.8 Flash's training data extends to 2026-03-31, but cannot make a direct comparison without Qwen3.8-27B's cutoff date.

Gemini 3.8 Flash

Mar 2026

Qwen3.8-27B

—

Provider Availability

Gemini 3.8 Flash is available from Google. Qwen3.8-27B is available from FriendliAI.

Gemini 3.8 Flash

google logo
Google
Input Price:Input: $0.75/1MOutput Price:Output: $3.75/1M

Qwen3.8-27B

friendli logo
FriendliAI
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Gemini 3.8 Flash and Qwen3.8-27B side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Gemini 3.8 Flash
✓ Preferred
Qwen3.8-27B
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Gemini 3.8 Flash vs Qwen3.8-27B.

Which is better, Gemini 3.8 Flash or Qwen3.8-27B?

Gemini 3.8 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 45.2. Gemini 3.8 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 3.8 Flash compare to Qwen3.8-27B in benchmarks?

Gemini 3.8 Flash scores Terminal-Bench 2.1: 89.4%, LVBench: 87.1%, CharXiv-R: 86.2%, LABBench2: 86.2%, DeepSWE 1.1: 73.7%. 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 3.8 Flash and Qwen3.8-27B?

Gemini 3.8 Flash supports 1.0M tokens and Qwen3.8-27B supports 262K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Gemini 3.8 Flash and Qwen3.8-27B?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (51.0 vs 45.2), context window (1.0M vs 262K), licensing (Proprietary vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Gemini 3.8 Flash and Qwen3.8-27B?

Gemini 3.8 Flash is developed by Google and Qwen3.8-27B is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.

Related comparisons