DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning) vs Qwen3.8 27B (Non-reasoning)
Which is better for the money: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning) by DeepSeek or Qwen3.8 27B (Non-reasoning) by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-27.
Clear winner
Verdict
Pick DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning)
Qwen3.8 27B (Non-reasoning) vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning): 18.2% less intelligence, 790.6% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 369.2% slower end-to-end.
| Metric | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning) | Qwen3.8 27B (Non-reasoning) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 24.7 | 20.2 | −18.2% Qwen3.8 27B (Non-reas… is 18.2% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $227.10 | $2,022.49 | +790.6% Qwen3.8 27B (Non-reas… is 8.9× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 2.95s | 13.84s | +369.2% Qwen3.8 27B (Non-reas… is 369.2% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $1.20 | $0.50 / $3.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image, Video |
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
- Qwen3.8 27B (Non-reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning)Qwen3.8 27B (Non-reasoning)Today's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/deepseek-v4-1-flash-non-reasoning/qwen3-8-27b-non-reasoning · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/deepseek-v4-1-flash-non-reasoning/qwen3-8-27b-non-reasoning?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill