Model comparison

Hy3 vs Qwen3.8 27B

Qwen3.8 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.0 to 44.2 on the Noometry Index. Hy3 costs 7.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.8 27B's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified October 10, 2026. 19 shared benchmarks.

Hy3

Tencent

44.2

Rank #79 Confirmed

Qwen3.8 27B

Alibaba (Qwen)

46.0

Rank #68 Confirmed

Summary

They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Hy3 scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.8 27B in 7 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.8 27B leads 41.0 to 26.1.
The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 41.2% for Hy3 and 54.5% for Qwen3.8 27B.
Hy3 is cheaper at $0.0825 / $0.33 per million input/output tokens, against $0.99 / $1.49 for Qwen3.8 27B.

Side by side

Hy3 and Qwen3.8 27B specifications
	Hy3	Qwen3.8 27B
Provider	Tencent	Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index	44.2	46.0
Released	2026-07-06	2026-08-14
Weights	Open	Open
Context window	262K	262K
Max output	128K	33K
Input $ / M tokens	$0.0825	$0.99
Output $ / M tokens	$0.33	$1.49
Results tracked	19	31

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.8 27B leads

Hy3: 46.8 (#63), Qwen3.8 27B: 50.5 (#44)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	Hy3	Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena WebDev	1508	1593
LMArena Coding	1464	1482
SciCode	—	46.6%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Hy3: —, Qwen3.8 27B: 32.9 (#57)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmark	Hy3	Qwen3.8 27B
APEX-Agents	—	47.5%

Reasoning Qwen3.8 27B leads

Hy3: 26.1 (#136), Qwen3.8 27B: 41.0 (#54)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	Hy3	Qwen3.8 27B
NYT Connections (extended)	41.2%	54.5%
LMArena Hard Prompts	1447	1460
ARC-AGI-2	—	42.4%
ARC-AGI-1	—	87.5%
CritPt	—	5.4%
DTBench	—	88%
LMCA	—	41.4%
Surface Evolver Bench	—	45%
Epoch Capabilities Index	—	149.38

Math Hy3 leads

Hy3: 40.1 (#93), Qwen3.8 27B: 37.1 (#161)

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	Hy3	Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena Math	1475	1456
ProofBench	—	16%

Knowledge Too close to call

Hy3: 40.8 (#114), Qwen3.8 27B: 41.6 (#109)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	Hy3	Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena Expert	1460	1482

Multimodal Not comparable

Hy3: —, Qwen3.8 27B: 41.3 (#37)

Multimodal benchmarks
Benchmark	Hy3	Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena Vision	—	1271

Multilingual Too close to call

Hy3: 53.5 (#65), Qwen3.8 27B: 53.7 (#60)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	Hy3	Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena Non-English	1426	1430
LMArena Chinese	1493	1504
LMArena French	1461	1465
LMArena German	1439	1438
LMArena Japanese	1392	1384
LMArena Korean	1395	1393
LMArena Russian	1432	1415
LMArena Spanish	1456	1448

Instruction Following Too close to call

Hy3: 75.1 (#70), Qwen3.8 27B: 75.8 (#53)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	Hy3	Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena Instruction Following	1426	1439

Long Context Too close to call

Hy3: 44.1 (#75), Qwen3.8 27B: 44.3 (#70)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	Hy3	Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena Longer Query	1442	1450

Writing & Preference Qwen3.8 27B leads

Hy3: 62.2 (#81), Qwen3.8 27B: 65.8 (#43)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	Hy3	Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena Text	1439	1441
LMArena Creative Writing	1402	1384
LMArena Multi-Turn	1436	1441
EQ-Bench Creative Writing	—	1671

Frequently asked questions

Is Hy3 better than Qwen3.8 27B?

Which is cheaper, Hy3 or Qwen3.8 27B?

Hy3 is cheaper. It lists at $0.0825 per million input tokens and $0.33 per million output tokens; Qwen3.8 27B lists at $0.99 and $1.49.

Is Hy3 or Qwen3.8 27B better for coding?

Qwen3.8 27B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.5 versus 46.8 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Both accept 262K tokens.

How many benchmarks do Hy3 and Qwen3.8 27B share?

19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Hy3 has 19 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.8 27B has 31.