Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Qwen3.8 27B (Low)
Which is better for the money: Gemini 2.5 Pro by Google or Qwen3.8 27B (Low) by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Qwen3.8 27B (Low) scores 10.1 points higher (26.2 vs 16.1) but costs 1.3× as much to run the benchmark ($1060 vs $823; both premium class). Pick Qwen3.8 27B (Low) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Gemini 2.5 Pro.
| Metric | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen3.8 27B (Low) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 16.1 | 26.2 | +62.7% Qwen3.8 27B (Low) is 62.7% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $822.85 | $1,060.08 | +28.8% Qwen3.8 27B (Low) is 28.8% more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 28.27s | 55.17s | +95.2% Qwen3.8 27B (Low) is 95.2% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $1.25 / $10.0 | $0.50 / $3.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Speech, Video | Text, Image, Video |
Qwen3.8 27B (Low) vs Gemini 2.5 Pro: 62.7% more intelligence, 28.8% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 95.2% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Gemini 2.5 Pro is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.
- Qwen3.8 27B (Low) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.
Gemini 2.5 ProQwen3.8 27B (Low)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/gemini-2-5-pro/qwen3-8-27b-low · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gemini-2-5-pro/qwen3-8-27b-low?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill