Muse Ember (Max) vs Qwen3.8 27B (Low)
Which is better for the money: Muse Ember (Max) by Meta or Qwen3.8 27B (Low) by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-11-10.
Clear winner
Verdict
Pick Muse Ember (Max)
Qwen3.8 27B (Low) vs Muse Ember (Max): 56.4% less intelligence, 1146.6% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 472.2% slower end-to-end.
| Metric | Muse Ember (Max) | Qwen3.8 27B (Low) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 36.0 | 15.7 | −56.4% Qwen3.8 27B (Low) is 56.4% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $117.12 | $1,460.07 | +1146.6% Qwen3.8 27B (Low) is 12× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 10.09s | 57.74s | +472.2% Qwen3.8 27B (Low) is 472.2% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.10 / $0.50 | $0.50 / $3.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image, Video |
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Muse Ember (Max) is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
- Qwen3.8 27B (Low) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 54.60 for $1124.
Muse Ember (Max)Qwen3.8 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/muse-ember/qwen3-8-27b-low · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/muse-ember/qwen3-8-27b-low?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill