The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Qwen3.8-27B vs Qwen3.8 Flash

Qwen3.8-27B and Qwen3.8 Flash are closely matched at 45.2 and 49.2 on the LLM Stats Score.

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

Which is better?

Qwen3.8-27B and Qwen3.8 Flash are closely matched on the overall LLM Stats Score at 45.2 and 49.2.

In the 18 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Qwen3.8 Flash wins 18; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

Qwen3.8 Flash also accepts a larger context window (1,000,000 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 Qwen3.8-27B

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

Choose Qwen3.8 Flash

  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 18 of 18 exact shared results
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,000,000 token context window
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Aug 2026

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Qwen3.8-27B
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.8 Flash
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
45.2
#30
49.2
#20
Reasoning
44.8
#31
48.8
#19
Coding
31.6
#39
36.0
#23
Agents
30.4
#31
34.6
#19
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
0 of 18
18 of 18
Input price
— / M
$0.15 / M
Output price
— / M
$0.47 / M
Context window
262,144
1,000,000

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

5 shared
Index
Qwen3.8-27B
Qwen3.8 Flash
Math
31.0#68
32.5#56
Vision
33.1#18
33.9#14
Tool use
22.7#42
30.6#14
Multimodal
36.9#6
35.6#10
Productivity
5.5#10
15.3#3
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

26 reported for Qwen3.8-27B · 22 for Qwen3.8 Flash

18 shared

Qwen3.8-27B outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Qwen3.8 Flash is better at 18 benchmarks (Agents' Last Exam, AndroidWorld, CharXiv-R, ClawEval-MM, CoWorkBench, DeepSWE 1.1, ERQA, GPQA, Humanity's Last Exam, IFBench, Job Bench, LiveCodeBench v6, MathVision, NL2Repo, RealWorldQA, RecreationBench, SWE-Bench Pro, Vision2Web).

Qwen3.8 Flash significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Sat Sep 05 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

97.2B diff

Qwen3.8 Flash has 97.2B more parameters than Qwen3.8-27B, making it 349.9% larger.

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.8-27B
27.8Bparameters
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.8 Flash
125.0Bparameters
27.8B
Qwen3.8-27B
125.0B
Qwen3.8 Flash

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Qwen3.8 Flash accepts 1,000,000 input tokens compared to Qwen3.8-27B's 262,144 tokens. Both models can generate responses up to 131,072 tokens.

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.8-27B
Input262,144 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.8 Flash
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Sat Sep 05 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

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

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

Qwen3.8-27B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Qwen3.8 Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

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

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

Qwen3.8-27B

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Qwen3.8 Flash

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Qwen3.8-27B was released on 2026-08-14, while Qwen3.8 Flash was released on 2026-08-26.

Qwen3.8 Flash is 0 month newer than Qwen3.8-27B.

Qwen3.8-27B

Aug 14, 2026

3 weeks ago

Qwen3.8 Flash

Aug 26, 2026

1 weeks ago

1w 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

Provider Availability

Qwen3.8-27B is available from FriendliAI. Qwen3.8 Flash is available from Novita.

Qwen3.8-27B

friendli logo
FriendliAI

Qwen3.8 Flash

novita logo
Novita
Input Price:Input: $0.15/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.47/1M
* 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 Qwen3.8-27B and Qwen3.8 Flash side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

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

FAQ

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

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

Qwen3.8-27B and Qwen3.8 Flash are closely matched on the LLM Stats Score at 45.2 and 49.2. Qwen3.8-27B is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team and Qwen3.8 Flash 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 Qwen3.8-27B compare to Qwen3.8 Flash in benchmarks?

Qwen3.8-27B scores MathVision: 94.6%, OmniDocBench 1.5: 91.1%, LiveCodeBench v6: 90.3%, CharXiv-R: 90.2%, GPQA: 89.2%. Qwen3.8 Flash scores MathVision: 95.7%, LiveCodeBench v6: 91.9%, GPQA: 91.7%, CharXiv-R: 90.6%, RealWorldQA: 88.5%.

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

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

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

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (45.2 vs 49.2), context window (262K vs 1.0M), licensing (Apache 2.0 vs Proprietary). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Related comparisons