Qwen3.8 Max vs Qwen3.8 27B
Too close to call on our weighted score (Qwen3.8 Max 69, Qwen3.8 27B 67). The right pick depends on what you value most.
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen3.8 Max
69/100- ECI156.6
- Price$2.00 / $6.00
- 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 2 points (Qwen3.8 Max 69/100, Qwen3.8 27B 67/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Qwen3.8 Max for raw capability and Qwen3.8 27B on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
- CapabilityQwen3.8 MaxCapabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3.8 Max 156.6 · Qwen3.8 27B 149.4
- Lowest priceQwen3.8 27BQwen3.8 27B $0.925 · Qwen3.8 Max $3.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextQwen3.8 MaxQwen3.8 Max 1,000,000 · Qwen3.8 27B 262,144 tokens
- Widest inputsQwen3.8 MaxQwen3.8 Max: Text, Images, PDFs, Video · Qwen3.8 27B: Text, Images, Video
- Self-hostingQwen3.8 27BPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | Qwen3.8 Max | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|---|
| CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI) | 50% | 86 | 77 |
| Price | 25% | 27 | 51 |
| Inputs & features | 15% | 90 | 80 |
| Context window | 10% | 60 | 37 |
| Overall | 100% | 69/100 | 67/100 |
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Qwen3.8 MaxAlibaba (Qwen) | Qwen3.8 27BAlibaba (Qwen) |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 156.6 (best) | 149.4 |
| ECI rank | #20 of 148 (best) | #53 of 148 |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | 92.7% | — |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics | 74.7% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | 99.4% | — |
| SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions | 45.8% | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $2.00 | $0.40 (best) |
| Output | $6.00 | $2.50 (best) |
| Cached input | $0.25 | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $3.00 | $0.925 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Alibaba API | Median of 39 providers |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 1,000,000 tokens (best) | 262,144 tokens |
| Max output | 131,072 tokens (best) | 32,768 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | Yes | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | Yes | Yes |
| Reasoning | Yeslow · medium · xhigh | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | Yes |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| API model ID | qwen3.8-max | — |
| API providers | 25 | 41 (best) |
| Released | Aug 3, 2026 | Aug 14, 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 Max$32.00
- Qwen3.8 27B$9.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Qwen3.8 Max or Qwen3.8 27B?
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 2 points (Qwen3.8 Max 69/100, Qwen3.8 27B 67/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Qwen3.8 Max for raw capability and Qwen3.8 27B on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
Which is cheaper, Qwen3.8 Max or Qwen3.8 27B?
Qwen3.8 27B is cheaper at $0.40 input / $2.50 output per million tokens (median across 39 API providers). Qwen3.8 Max costs $2.00 input / $6.00 output per million tokens (official Alibaba 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 $3.00 for Qwen3.8 Max (3.2× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
Qwen3.8 Max scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3.8 Max 156.6 (#20 of 148) and Qwen3.8 27B 149.4 (#53 of 148). Their confidence ranges do not overlap (154.5–158.8 vs 147.5–151.6), so the gap is a real one.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3.8 Max and Qwen3.8 27B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Qwen3.8 Max 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?
Qwen3.8 Max has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 262,144 for Qwen3.8 27B. Maximum output per response: Qwen3.8 Max up to 131,072, Qwen3.8 27B up to 32,768 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Qwen3.8 Max accepts text, images, PDFs and video; Qwen3.8 27B accepts text, images and video. Qwen3.8 Max handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Qwen3.8 27B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Qwen3.8 Max is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Qwen3.8 27B is the newest, released Aug 14, 2026. Qwen3.8 Max came out Aug 3, 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 Grok 4.6Three-way comparison
- Qwen3.8 Max vs Grok 4.6xAI · ECI 156.6
- Qwen3.8 Max vs Claude Sonnet 5Anthropic · ECI 156.3
- Qwen3.8 Max vs GLM-5.3Z.ai (Zhipu) · ECI 155.8
- Qwen3.8 Max vs Muse Spark 1.3Meta · ECI 156.9
- Qwen3.8 27B vs Inkling SmallThinking Machines · ECI 150.2
- Qwen3.8 27B vs Kimi K2.7 CodeMoonshot AI · ECI 150.0
