Noometry

Model comparison

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B vs Qwen3.8 27B

Qwen3.8 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.0 to 29.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 19 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B Google

29.9

Rank #301 Confirmed

Qwen3.8 27B Alibaba (Qwen)

46.0

Rank #68 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.8 27B in 9 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.8 27B leads 41.6 to 16.0.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 50% for Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B and 88% for Qwen3.8 27B.
  • Qwen3.8 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8BQwen3.8 27B
ProviderGoogleAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index29.946.0
Released2024-10-032026-08-14
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window—262K
Max output—33K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.99
Output $ / M tokens—$1.49
Results tracked2131

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.8 27B leads

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B: 35.5 (#225), Qwen3.8 27B: 50.5 (#44)

BenchmarkGemini 1.5 Flash 8BQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Coding12181482
LMArena WebDev—1593
SciCode—46.6%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B: —, Qwen3.8 27B: 32.9 (#57)

BenchmarkGemini 1.5 Flash 8BQwen3.8 27B
APEX-Agents—47.5%

Reasoning Qwen3.8 27B leads

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B: 20.0 (#244), Qwen3.8 27B: 41.0 (#54)

BenchmarkGemini 1.5 Flash 8BQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Hard Prompts12091460
DTBench50%88%
ARC-AGI-2—42.4%
NYT Connections (extended)—54.5%
ARC-AGI-1—87.5%
CritPt—5.4%
LMCA—41.4%
Surface Evolver Bench—45%
Epoch Capabilities Index—149.38

Math Qwen3.8 27B leads

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B: 14.2 (#302), Qwen3.8 27B: 37.1 (#161)

BenchmarkGemini 1.5 Flash 8BQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Math12071456
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20254.6%—
ProofBench—16%

Knowledge Qwen3.8 27B leads

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B: 16.0 (#289), Qwen3.8 27B: 41.6 (#109)

BenchmarkGemini 1.5 Flash 8BQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Expert11851482
GPQA Diamond33%—

Multimodal Qwen3.8 27B leads

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B: 28.2 (#115), Qwen3.8 27B: 41.3 (#37)

BenchmarkGemini 1.5 Flash 8BQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Vision10441271

Multilingual Qwen3.8 27B leads

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B: 38.5 (#229), Qwen3.8 27B: 53.7 (#60)

BenchmarkGemini 1.5 Flash 8BQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Non-English12151430
LMArena Chinese12311504
LMArena French12341465
LMArena German12061438
LMArena Japanese11501384
LMArena Korean11401393
LMArena Russian12361415
LMArena Spanish12121448

Instruction Following Qwen3.8 27B leads

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B: 62.8 (#236), Qwen3.8 27B: 75.8 (#53)

BenchmarkGemini 1.5 Flash 8BQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Instruction Following11991439

Long Context Qwen3.8 27B leads

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B: 37.0 (#225), Qwen3.8 27B: 44.3 (#70)

BenchmarkGemini 1.5 Flash 8BQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Longer Query12191450

Writing & Preference Qwen3.8 27B leads

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B: 42.8 (#232), Qwen3.8 27B: 65.8 (#43)

BenchmarkGemini 1.5 Flash 8BQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Text12261441
LMArena Creative Writing12181384
LMArena Multi-Turn11851441
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1671

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B better than Qwen3.8 27B?

Qwen3.8 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.0 to 29.9 on the Noometry Index.

Is Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B or Qwen3.8 27B better for coding?

Qwen3.8 27B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.5 versus 35.5 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B and Qwen3.8 27B share?

19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B has 21 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.8 27B has 31.

Related comparisons

Go deeper