Model comparison
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite vs Qwen3.8 27B
Qwen3.8 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.0 to 41.5 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 30 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 30 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.8 27B in 9 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.8 27B leads 41.0 to 27.8.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ARC-AGI-1: 53.5% for Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite and 87.5% for Qwen3.8 27B.
- Qwen3.8 27B is cheaper at $0.04 / $2.30 per million input/output tokens, against $0.30 / $2.50 for Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite.
- Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 262K.
- Qwen3.8 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.8 27B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 41.5 | 46.0 |
| Released | 2026-07-21 | 2026-08-14 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | 262K |
| Max output | 66K | 33K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.30 | $0.04 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.50 | $2.30 |
| Results tracked | 39 | 31 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3.8 27B leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 42.4 (#104), Qwen3.8 27B: 50.5 (#44)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1440 | 1593 |
| SciCode | 41.3% | 46.6% |
| LMArena Coding | 1453 | 1482 |
| WeirdML | 39% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 765.27 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Qwen3.8 27B leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 25.7 (#107), Qwen3.8 27B: 32.9 (#57)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 29.3% | 47.5% |
| GDP.pdf | 10% | — |
Reasoning Qwen3.8 27B leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 27.8 (#114), Qwen3.8 27B: 41.0 (#54)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 10.3% | 42.4% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 60.4% | 54.5% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 53.5% | 87.5% |
| CritPt | 0% | 5.4% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1441 | 1460 |
| DTBench | 83.5% | 88% |
| LMCA | 37.6% | 41.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 145.13 | 149.38 |
| Chess Puzzles | 22% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 19% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 45% |
Math Qwen3.8 27B leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 25.9 (#264), Qwen3.8 27B: 37.1 (#161)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | 13% | 16% |
| LMArena Math | 1433 | 1456 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 26% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 0% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 71.1% | — |
Knowledge Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 50.1 (#72), Qwen3.8 27B: 41.6 (#109)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1435 | 1482 |
| GPQA Diamond | 83.3% | — |
Multimodal Too close to call
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 41.1 (#40), Qwen3.8 27B: 41.3 (#37)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1268 | 1271 |
Multilingual Too close to call
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 53.5 (#63), Qwen3.8 27B: 53.7 (#60)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1427 | 1430 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1469 | 1504 |
| LMArena French | 1451 | 1465 |
| LMArena German | 1454 | 1438 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1427 | 1384 |
| LMArena Korean | 1407 | 1393 |
| LMArena Russian | 1443 | 1415 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1442 | 1448 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 74.8 (#85), Qwen3.8 27B: 75.8 (#53)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1420 | 1439 |
Long Context Too close to call
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 43.9 (#84), Qwen3.8 27B: 44.3 (#70)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1435 | 1450 |
Writing & Preference Qwen3.8 27B leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 64.2 (#57), Qwen3.8 27B: 65.8 (#43)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1435 | 1441 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1420 | 1384 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1559 | 1671 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1445 | 1441 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite better than Qwen3.8 27B?
Qwen3.8 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.0 to 41.5 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite or Qwen3.8 27B?
Qwen3.8 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.04 per million input tokens and $2.30 per million output tokens; Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite lists at $0.30 and $2.50.
Is Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite or Qwen3.8 27B better for coding?
Qwen3.8 27B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.5 versus 42.4 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite does, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite and Qwen3.8 27B share?
30 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite has 39 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.8 27B has 31.