The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking vs Qwen3.8-27B

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

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Qwen3.8-27B is better at 6 benchmarks (CharXiv-R, ERQA, GPQA, LiveCodeBench v6, MathVision, RealWorldQA). Qwen3.8-27B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Based on current benchmark, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking

  • you are already invested in the Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team ecosystem

Choose Qwen3.8-27B

  • you want the strongest raw capability — it leads on 6 of 6 shared benchmarks
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Aug 2026

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.8-27B
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Benchmark wins
0 of 6
6 of 6
Input price
— / M
— / M
Output price
— / M
— / M
Context window
—
—
Released
Sep 2025
Aug 2026
License
Apache 2.0
Apache 2.0

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

6 benchmarks

Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Qwen3.8-27B is better at 6 benchmarks (CharXiv-R, ERQA, GPQA, LiveCodeBench v6, MathVision, RealWorldQA).

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

Mon Aug 24 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Playground indexes and blind preference scores

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

5.2B diff

Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking has 5.2B more parameters than Qwen3.8-27B, making it 18.8% larger.

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking
33.0Bparameters
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.8-27B
27.8Bparameters
33.0B
Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking
27.8B
Qwen3.8-27B

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Both Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking and Qwen3.8-27B support multimodal inputs.

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

Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Qwen3.8-27B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Both models are licensed under Apache 2.0.

Both models share the same licensing terms, providing consistent usage rights.

Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Qwen3.8-27B

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking was released on 2025-09-22, while Qwen3.8-27B was released on 2026-08-14.

Qwen3.8-27B is 11 months newer than Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking.

Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking

Sep 22, 2025

11 months ago

Qwen3.8-27B

Aug 14, 2026

1 weeks ago

10mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking and Qwen3.8-27B side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking
✓ Preferred
Qwen3.8-27B
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking vs Qwen3.8-27B.

Which is better, Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking or Qwen3.8-27B?

Qwen3.8-27B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team and Qwen3.8-27B is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.

How does Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking compare to Qwen3.8-27B in benchmarks?

Qwen3 VL 32B Thinking scores DocVQAtest: 96.1%, ScreenSpot: 95.7%, MMLU-Redux: 91.9%, MMBench-V1.1: 90.8%, CharXiv-D: 90.2%. Qwen3.8-27B scores MathVision: 94.6%, OmniDocBench 1.5: 91.1%, LiveCodeBench v6: 90.3%, CharXiv-R: 90.2%, GPQA: 89.2%.

Related comparisons