Noometry

Model comparison

GPT-4.1 nano vs Qwen3.8 27B

Qwen3.8 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.0 to 27.9 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4.1 nano costs 6.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.8 27B's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 23 shared benchmarks.

GPT-4.1 nano OpenAI

27.9

Rank #327 Confirmed

Qwen3.8 27B Alibaba (Qwen)

46.0

Rank #68 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 23 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-4.1 nano scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.8 27B in 10 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.8 27B leads 41.0 to 8.5.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is ARC-AGI-1: 0% for GPT-4.1 nano and 87.5% for Qwen3.8 27B.
  • GPT-4.1 nano is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $0.99 / $1.49 for Qwen3.8 27B.
  • GPT-4.1 nano accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 262K.
  • Qwen3.8 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GPT-4.1 nanoQwen3.8 27B
ProviderOpenAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index27.946.0
Released2025-04-142026-08-14
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1.05M262K
Max output33K33K
Input $ / M tokens$0.10$0.99
Output $ / M tokens$0.40$1.49
Results tracked3831

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.8 27B leads

GPT-4.1 nano: 24.1 (#330), Qwen3.8 27B: 50.5 (#44)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoQwen3.8 27B
SciCode25.9%46.6%
LMArena Coding13061482
Aider Polyglot8.9%—
LMArena WebDev—1593
WeirdML19%—

Agentic & Tool Use Qwen3.8 27B leads

GPT-4.1 nano: 26.5 (#104), Qwen3.8 27B: 32.9 (#57)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoQwen3.8 27B
APEX-Agents—47.5%
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard33%—

Reasoning Qwen3.8 27B leads

GPT-4.1 nano: 8.5 (#349), Qwen3.8 27B: 41.0 (#54)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoQwen3.8 27B
ARC-AGI-20%42.4%
ARC-AGI-10%87.5%
CritPt0%5.4%
LMArena Hard Prompts12861460
DTBench52.5%88%
LMCA5.5%41.4%
Epoch Capabilities Index129.62149.38
Kagi LLM Benchmark33.3%—
NYT Connections (extended)—54.5%
Surface Evolver Bench—45%

Math Qwen3.8 27B leads

GPT-4.1 nano: 26.9 (#252), Qwen3.8 27B: 37.1 (#161)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Math12741456
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202528.9%—
ProofBench—16%
Omni-MATH36.7%—
MATH Level 570%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)1%—

Knowledge Qwen3.8 27B leads

GPT-4.1 nano: 21.8 (#273), Qwen3.8 27B: 41.6 (#109)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Expert12721482
GPQA Diamond48.9%—
SimpleQA Verified6%—
MMLU-Pro55%—
GPQA (HELM)50.7%—

Multimodal Qwen3.8 27B leads

GPT-4.1 nano: 29.2 (#113), Qwen3.8 27B: 41.3 (#37)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Vision10631271

Multilingual Qwen3.8 27B leads

GPT-4.1 nano: 41.6 (#205), Qwen3.8 27B: 53.7 (#60)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Non-English12601430
LMArena Chinese12701504
LMArena German12881438
LMArena Japanese11981384
LMArena Russian12611415
LMArena French—1465
LMArena Korean—1393
LMArena Spanish—1448

Instruction Following Qwen3.8 27B leads

GPT-4.1 nano: 67.8 (#193), Qwen3.8 27B: 75.8 (#53)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Instruction Following12671439
IFEval84.3%—

Long Context Qwen3.8 27B leads

GPT-4.1 nano: 23.7 (#296), Qwen3.8 27B: 44.3 (#70)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Longer Query12831450
Fiction.LiveBench25%—

Writing & Preference Qwen3.8 27B leads

GPT-4.1 nano: 40.5 (#243), Qwen3.8 27B: 65.8 (#43)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Text12851441
LMArena Creative Writing12601384
EQ-Bench Creative Writing9461671
LMArena Multi-Turn12771441
WildBench81.2%—

Frequently asked questions

Is GPT-4.1 nano better than Qwen3.8 27B?

Qwen3.8 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.0 to 27.9 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4.1 nano costs 6.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.8 27B's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, GPT-4.1 nano or Qwen3.8 27B?

GPT-4.1 nano is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Qwen3.8 27B lists at $0.99 and $1.49.

Is GPT-4.1 nano or Qwen3.8 27B better for coding?

Qwen3.8 27B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.5 versus 24.1 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

GPT-4.1 nano does, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks do GPT-4.1 nano and Qwen3.8 27B share?

23 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-4.1 nano has 38 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.8 27B has 31.

Related comparisons

Go deeper