ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

Qwen3.8 27B vs Gemini 4 Argon

Gemini 4 Argon comes out ahead, 74 to 66 on our weighted score, though Qwen3.8 27B is 4.3× cheaper per token.

  1. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.8 27B

    Released Aug 14, 2026

    66/100
    • ECI151.8
    • Price$0.40 / $2.55
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3.8 27B
  2. Our pick

    Google

    Gemini 4 Argon

    Released Oct 13, 2026New

    74/100
    • ECI166.1
    • Price$2.00 / $10.00
    • Context1.05M
    Full specs Remove Gemini 4 Argon

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Gemini 4 Argon is our pick

Gemini 4 Argon is the better all-round choice, scoring 74/100 against Qwen3.8 27B (66). It leads on capability, inputs & features and context window. Qwen3.8 27B wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityGemini 4 ArgonCapabilities Index (ECI): Gemini 4 Argon 166.1 · Qwen3.8 27B 151.8
  • Lowest priceQwen3.8 27BQwen3.8 27B $0.938 · Gemini 4 Argon $4.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextGemini 4 ArgonGemini 4 Argon 1,048,576 · Qwen3.8 27B 262,144 tokens
  • Widest inputsGemini 4 ArgonQwen3.8 27B: Text, Images, Video · Gemini 4 Argon: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video
  • Self-hostingQwen3.8 27BPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightQwen3.8 27BGemini 4 Argon
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%7996
Price25%4920
Inputs & features15%70100
Context window10%3761
Overall100%66/10074/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Qwen3.8 27B vs Gemini 4 Argon specifications side by side
SpecificationQwen3.8 27BAlibaba (Qwen)Gemini 4 ArgonGoogle
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)151.8166.1 (best)
ECI rank#54 of 165#7 of 165 (best)
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions—96.4%
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics—86.0%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics—100%
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions—76.0%
Price per million tokens
Input$0.40 (best)$2.00
Output$2.55 (best)$10.00
Cached input—$0.10
Blended (3:1)$0.938 (best)$4.00
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 49 providersOfficial Google API
Limits
Context window262,144 tokens1,048,576 tokens (best)
Max output32,768 tokens65,536 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesYes
PDFsNoYes
AudioNoYes
VideoYesYes
ReasoningYesYeslow · medium · high
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoYes
Availability
WeightsOpenProprietary
API model ID—gemini-4-argon
API providers53 (best)24
ReleasedAug 14, 2026Oct 13, 2026
Knowledge cutoff—Mar 2026
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Qwen3.8 27B$9.10
  • Gemini 4 Argon$40.00
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Qwen3.8 27B or Gemini 4 Argon?

Gemini 4 Argon is the better all-round choice, scoring 74/100 against Qwen3.8 27B (66). It leads on capability, inputs & features and context window. Qwen3.8 27B wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3.8 27B or Gemini 4 Argon?

Qwen3.8 27B is cheaper at $0.40 input / $2.55 output per million tokens (median across 49 API providers). Gemini 4 Argon costs $2.00 input / $10.00 output per million tokens (official Google API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.938 per million tokens for Qwen3.8 27B versus $4.00 for Gemini 4 Argon (4.3× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Gemini 4 Argon scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Gemini 4 Argon 166.1 (#7 of 165) and Qwen3.8 27B 151.8 (#54 of 165). Their confidence ranges do not overlap (163.1–170.3 vs 149.9–153.6), so the gap is a real one.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3.8 27B and Gemini 4 Argon yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Gemini 4 Argon 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?

Gemini 4 Argon has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 262,144 for Qwen3.8 27B. Maximum output per response: Qwen3.8 27B up to 32,768, Gemini 4 Argon up to 65,536 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Qwen3.8 27B accepts text, images and video; Gemini 4 Argon accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video. Gemini 4 Argon handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Qwen3.8 27B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Gemini 4 Argon is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Gemini 4 Argon is the newest, released Oct 13, 2026. Qwen3.8 27B came out Aug 14, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Gemini 4 Argon Mar 2026.

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 Nov 2, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons