Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs Qwen3.8 27B (Medium)
Which is better for the money: Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B by Alibaba or Qwen3.8 27B (Medium) by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-27.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B scores 12.3 points higher (39.9 vs 27.6) but costs 2.1× as much to run the benchmark ($2632 vs $1278; flagship vs premium cost classes). Pick Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Qwen3.8 27B (Medium).
| Metric | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Qwen3.8 27B (Medium) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 39.9 | 27.6 | −30.8% Qwen3.8 27B (Medium) is 30.8% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $2,632.05 | $1,277.59 | −51.5% Qwen3.8 27B (Medium) is 51.5% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 63.76s | 55.72s | −12.6% Qwen3.8 27B (Medium) is 12.6% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $2.00 / $6.00 | $0.50 / $3.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text, Image, Video |
Qwen3.8 27B (Medium) vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B: 30.8% less intelligence, 51.5% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 12.6% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) scores 53.60 for $2172.
- Qwen3.8 27B (Medium) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95BQwen3.8 27B (Medium)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/qwen3-8-2-4t-a95b/qwen3-8-27b-medium · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/qwen3-8-2-4t-a95b/qwen3-8-27b-medium?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill