Qwen3.7 Plus vs Qwen3.8 27B
Too close to call on our weighted score (Qwen3.7 Plus 70, Qwen3.8 27B 67). The right pick depends on what you value most.
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen3.7 Plus
70/100- ECI147.4
- Price$0.40 / $1.60
- Context1M
- Alibaba (Qwen)
Qwen3.8 27B
67/100- ECI149.4
- Price$0.40 / $2.50
- Context262K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Too close to call
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 3 points (Qwen3.7 Plus 70/100, Qwen3.8 27B 67/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Qwen3.8 27B for raw capability, Qwen3.7 Plus on price and Qwen3.7 Plus for long inputs. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
- CapabilityQwen3.8 27BCapabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3.8 27B 149.4 · Qwen3.7 Plus 147.4
- Lowest priceQwen3.7 PlusQwen3.7 Plus $0.70 · Qwen3.8 27B $0.925 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextQwen3.7 PlusQwen3.7 Plus 1,000,000 · Qwen3.8 27B 262,144 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsQwen3.7 Plus: Text, Images, Video · Qwen3.8 27B: Text, Images, Video
- Self-hostingQwen3.8 27BPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | Qwen3.7 Plus | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|---|
| CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI) | 50% | 75 | 77 |
| Price | 25% | 57 | 51 |
| Inputs & features | 15% | 80 | 80 |
| Context window | 10% | 60 | 37 |
| Overall | 100% | 70/100 | 67/100 |
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Qwen3.7 PlusAlibaba (Qwen) | Qwen3.8 27BAlibaba (Qwen) |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 147.4 | 149.4 (best) |
| ECI rank | #61 of 148 | #53 of 148 (best) |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | 87.9% | — |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics | 34.4% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | 93.3% | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.40 | $0.40 |
| Output | $1.60 (best) | $2.50 |
| Cached input | $0.04 | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.70 (best) | $0.925 |
| Long-context rate | Over 256K: $1.20 / $4.80 | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Alibaba API | Median of 39 providers |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 1,000,000 tokens (best) | 262,144 tokens |
| Max output | 64,000 tokens (best) | 32,768 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | Yes | Yes |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | Yes |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| API model ID | qwen3.7-plus | — |
| API providers | 25 | 41 (best) |
| Released | Jun 2, 2026 | Aug 14, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Apr 2025 | — |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Qwen3.7 Plus$7.20
- Qwen3.8 27B$9.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Qwen3.7 Plus or Qwen3.8 27B?
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 3 points (Qwen3.7 Plus 70/100, Qwen3.8 27B 67/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Qwen3.8 27B for raw capability, Qwen3.7 Plus on price and Qwen3.7 Plus for long inputs. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
Which is cheaper, Qwen3.7 Plus or Qwen3.8 27B?
Qwen3.7 Plus is cheaper at $0.40 input / $1.60 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). Qwen3.8 27B costs $0.40 input / $2.50 output per million tokens (median across 39 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.70 per million tokens for Qwen3.7 Plus versus $0.925 for Qwen3.8 27B (1.3× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
Qwen3.8 27B scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3.8 27B 149.4 (#53 of 148) and Qwen3.7 Plus 147.4 (#61 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (147.5–151.6 vs 145.7–148.9), so treat the gap as small.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3.7 Plus and Qwen3.8 27B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Qwen3.8 27B leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3.7 Plus has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 262,144 for Qwen3.8 27B. Maximum output per response: Qwen3.7 Plus up to 64,000, Qwen3.8 27B up to 32,768 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Qwen3.7 Plus accepts text, images and video; Qwen3.8 27B accepts text, images and video. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
Qwen3.8 27B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Qwen3.7 Plus is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Qwen3.8 27B is the newest, released Aug 14, 2026. Qwen3.7 Plus came out Jun 2, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Qwen3.7 Plus Apr 2025.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.
Related comparisons
- Add MiniMax-M3Three-way comparison
- Qwen3.7 Plus vs MiniMax-M3MiniMax · ECI 147.0
- Qwen3.7 Plus vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55BNVIDIA · ECI 146.2
- Qwen3.7 Plus vs Inkling SmallThinking Machines · ECI 150.2
- Qwen3.7 Plus vs Gemini 3.5 Flash LiteGoogle · ECI 145.1
- Qwen3.8 27B vs Inkling SmallThinking Machines · ECI 150.2
- Qwen3.8 27B vs Kimi K2.7 CodeMoonshot AI · ECI 150.0
