Qwen3.8 27B (Low) vs Beam 1.0
Which is better for the money: Qwen3.8 27B (Low) by Alibaba or Beam 1.0 by Reflection? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-24.
Clear winner
Verdict
Pick Beam 1.0
Beam 1.0 vs Qwen3.8 27B (Low): 15.6% more intelligence, 69.9% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 85.2% faster end-to-end.
| Metric | Qwen3.8 27B (Low) | Beam 1.0 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 26.2 | 30.3 | +15.6% Beam 1.0 is 15.6% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $1,060.08 | $318.73 | −69.9% Beam 1.0 is 69.9% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 54.35s | 8.02s | −85.2% Beam 1.0 is 85.2% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.50 / $3.00 | $0.40 / $1.20 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Video | Text |
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Qwen3.8 27B (Low) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.
- Beam 1.0 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
Qwen3.8 27B (Low)Beam 1.0Today'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/qwen3-8-27b-low/reflection-beam · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/qwen3-8-27b-low/reflection-beam?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill