Gemini 3.8 Flash (High) vs Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh)
Which is better for the money: Gemini 3.8 Flash (High) by Google or Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh) by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-24.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Gemini 3.8 Flash (High) scores 7.2 points higher (40.9 vs 33.7) but costs 1.2× as much to run the benchmark ($1623 vs $1336; both premium class). Pick Gemini 3.8 Flash (High) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh).
| Metric | Gemini 3.8 Flash (High) | Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 40.9 | 33.7 | −17.6% Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh) is 17.6% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $1,622.73 | $1,336.09 | −17.7% Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh) is 17.7% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 33.13s | 60.10s | +81.4% Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh) is 81.4% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.75 / $3.75 | $0.50 / $3.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Speech, Video | Text, Image, Video |
Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh) vs Gemini 3.8 Flash (High): 17.6% less intelligence, 17.7% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 81.4% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Gemini 3.8 Flash (High) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
- Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
Gemini 3.8 Flash (High)Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh)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-3-8-flash/qwen3-8-27b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gemini-3-8-flash/qwen3-8-27b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill