Qwen3.8 27B vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
Qwen3.8 27B comes out ahead, 67 to 62 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
- Our pick
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen3.8 27B
67/100- ECI149.4
- Price$0.40 / $2.50
- Context262K
NVIDIANemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
62/100- ECI146.2
- Price$0.50 / $2.50
- Context1M
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Qwen3.8 27B is our pick
Qwen3.8 27B is the better all-round choice, scoring 67/100 against Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B (62). It leads on capability, price and inputs & features. Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B wins on context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
- CapabilityQwen3.8 27BCapabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3.8 27B 149.4 · Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B 146.2
- Lowest priceQwen3.8 27BQwen3.8 27B $0.925 · Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B $1.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextNemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55BNemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B 1,000,000 · Qwen3.8 27B 262,144 tokens
- Widest inputsQwen3.8 27BQwen3.8 27B: Text, Images, Video · Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B: Text
- Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
| Measure | Weight | Qwen3.8 27B | Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B |
|---|---|---|---|
| CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI) | 50% | 77 | 73 |
| Price | 25% | 51 | 50 |
| Inputs & features | 15% | 80 | 45 |
| Context window | 10% | 37 | 60 |
| Overall | 100% | 67/100 | 62/100 |
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Qwen3.8 27BAlibaba (Qwen) | Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55BNVIDIA |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 149.4 (best) | 146.2 |
| ECI rank | #53 of 148 (best) | #70 of 148 |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | — | 85.4% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | — | 86.7% |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.40 (best) | $0.50 |
| Output | $2.50 | $2.50 |
| Cached input | — | $0.15 |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.925 (best) | $1.00 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 39 providers | Official Nvidia API |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 262,144 tokens | 1,000,000 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 32,768 tokens | 128,000 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | No |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | Yes | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | Yes |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Open | Open |
| API model ID | — | nvidia/nemotron-3-ultra-550b-a55b |
| API providers | 41 (best) | 21 |
| Released | Aug 14, 2026 | Jun 4, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | — |
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$9.00
- Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B$10.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Qwen3.8 27B or Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B?
Qwen3.8 27B is the better all-round choice, scoring 67/100 against Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B (62). It leads on capability, price and inputs & features. Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B wins on context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
Which is cheaper, Qwen3.8 27B or Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B?
Qwen3.8 27B is cheaper at $0.40 input / $2.50 output per million tokens (median across 39 API providers). Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B costs $0.50 input / $2.50 output per million tokens (official Nvidia API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.925 per million tokens for Qwen3.8 27B versus $1.00 for Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B (1.1× 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 Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B 146.2 (#70 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (147.5–151.6 vs 143.9–148.1), so treat the gap as small.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3.8 27B and Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B 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?
Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 262,144 for Qwen3.8 27B. Maximum output per response: Qwen3.8 27B up to 32,768, Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B up to 128,000 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Qwen3.8 27B accepts text, images and video; Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B accepts text. Qwen3.8 27B handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Yes, both publish their weights, so you can self-host them.
Which is newer?
Qwen3.8 27B is the newest, released Aug 14, 2026. Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B came out Jun 4, 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 Oct 4, 2026.
Related comparisons
- Add Inkling SmallThree-way comparison
- Qwen3.8 27B vs Inkling SmallThinking Machines · ECI 150.2
- Qwen3.8 27B vs Kimi K2.7 CodeMoonshot AI · ECI 150.0
- Qwen3.8 27B vs Grok 4.3xAI · ECI 149.2
- Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B vs Qwen3.6 27BAlibaba (Qwen) · ECI 146.5
- Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B vs Gemini 3.5 Flash LiteGoogle · ECI 145.1
- Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B vs Kimi K2 ThinkingMoonshot AI · ECI 146.0
