Model comparison
Gemma 3n E4b IT vs Qwen3.8 27B
Qwen3.8 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.0 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 3n E4b IT scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.8 27B in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.8 27B leads 41.0 to 19.9.
Side by side
| Gemma 3n E4b IT | Qwen3.8 27B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 37.3 | 46.0 |
| Released | — | 2026-08-14 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 262K |
| Max output | — | 33K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.99 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $1.49 |
| Results tracked | 18 | 31 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3.8 27B leads
Gemma 3n E4b IT: 37.0 (#198), Qwen3.8 27B: 50.5 (#44)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1268 | 1482 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1593 |
| SciCode | — | 46.6% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemma 3n E4b IT: —, Qwen3.8 27B: 32.9 (#57)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 47.5% |
Reasoning Qwen3.8 27B leads
Gemma 3n E4b IT: 19.9 (#247), Qwen3.8 27B: 41.0 (#54)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1284 | 1460 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 42.4% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 31.5% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 54.5% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 87.5% |
| CritPt | — | 5.4% |
| DTBench | — | 88% |
| LMCA | — | 41.4% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 45% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 149.38 |
Math Qwen3.8 27B leads
Gemma 3n E4b IT: 35.1 (#188), Qwen3.8 27B: 37.1 (#161)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1251 | 1456 |
| ProofBench | — | 16% |
Knowledge Qwen3.8 27B leads
Gemma 3n E4b IT: 34.2 (#198), Qwen3.8 27B: 41.6 (#109)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1246 | 1482 |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemma 3n E4b IT: —, Qwen3.8 27B: 41.3 (#37)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1271 |
Multilingual Qwen3.8 27B leads
Gemma 3n E4b IT: 43.4 (#183), Qwen3.8 27B: 53.7 (#60)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1285 | 1430 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1309 | 1504 |
| LMArena French | 1330 | 1465 |
| LMArena German | 1311 | 1438 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1272 | 1384 |
| LMArena Korean | 1259 | 1393 |
| LMArena Russian | 1288 | 1415 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1305 | 1448 |
Instruction Following Qwen3.8 27B leads
Gemma 3n E4b IT: 66.1 (#210), Qwen3.8 27B: 75.8 (#53)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1255 | 1439 |
Long Context Qwen3.8 27B leads
Gemma 3n E4b IT: 38.7 (#191), Qwen3.8 27B: 44.3 (#70)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1276 | 1450 |
Writing & Preference Qwen3.8 27B leads
Gemma 3n E4b IT: 50.1 (#186), Qwen3.8 27B: 65.8 (#43)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1306 | 1441 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1287 | 1384 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1276 | 1441 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1671 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 3n E4b IT better than Qwen3.8 27B?
Qwen3.8 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.0 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemma 3n E4b IT or Qwen3.8 27B better for coding?
Qwen3.8 27B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.5 versus 37.0 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 3n E4b IT and Qwen3.8 27B share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3n E4b IT has 18 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.8 27B has 31.