Qwen3.8 27B (Non-reasoning) vs Qwen3.8 Max (0902)
Which is better for the money: Qwen3.8 27B (Non-reasoning) by Alibaba or Qwen3.8 Max (0902) 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 Max (0902) scores 25.2 points higher (45.4 vs 20.2) but costs 2.4× as much to run the benchmark ($4935 vs $2022; both flagship class). Pick Qwen3.8 Max (0902) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Qwen3.8 27B (Non-reasoning).
| Metric | Qwen3.8 27B (Non-reasoning) | Qwen3.8 Max (0902) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 20.2 | 45.4 | +124.8% Qwen3.8 Max (0902) is 2.2× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $2,022.49 | $4,934.79 | +144.0% Qwen3.8 Max (0902) is 2.4× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 13.95s | 64.07s | +359.3% Qwen3.8 Max (0902) is 359.3% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.50 / $3.00 | $2.00 / $6.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Video | Text, Image |
Qwen3.8 Max (0902) vs Qwen3.8 27B (Non-reasoning): 124.8% more intelligence, 144.0% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 359.3% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Qwen3.8 27B (Non-reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
- Qwen3.8 Max (0902) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) scores 56.00 for $4057.
Qwen3.8 27B (Non-reasoning)Qwen3.8 Max (0902)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/qwen3-8-27b-non-reasoning/qwen3-8-max · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/qwen3-8-27b-non-reasoning/qwen3-8-max?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill