Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning) vs Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh)
Which is better for the money: Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning) by Alibaba or Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh) 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 (Xhigh) scores 22.5 points higher (33.7 vs 11.2) but costs 4.4× as much to run the benchmark ($1459 vs $329; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh) when you need intelligence above 11.2, and Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning) when 11.2 is enough.
| Metric | Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning) | Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 11.2 | 33.7 | +200.9% Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh) is 3.0× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $328.86 | $1,458.94 | +343.6% Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh) is 4.4× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 43.82s | 61.13s | +39.5% Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh) is 39.5% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.14 / $0.20 | $0.50 / $3.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Video | Text, Image, Video |
Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh) vs Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning): 200.9% more intelligence, 343.6% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 39.5% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
- Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning)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/qwen3-5-9b/qwen3-8-27b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/qwen3-5-9b/qwen3-8-27b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill