Noometry

Model comparison

Phi 3 Mini 128k Instruct vs Qwen3.8 27B

Qwen3.8 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.0 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

Phi 3 Mini 128k Instruct Microsoft

29.7

Rank #305 Confirmed

Qwen3.8 27B Alibaba (Qwen)

46.0

Rank #68 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Phi 3 Mini 128k Instruct scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.8 27B in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen3.8 27B leads 65.8 to 27.1.

Side by side

Phi 3 Mini 128k InstructQwen3.8 27B
ProviderMicrosoftAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index29.746.0
Released2024-04-232026-08-14
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—262K
Max output—33K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.04
Output $ / M tokens—$2.30
Results tracked1931

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.8 27B leads

Phi 3 Mini 128k Instruct: 28.8 (#312), Qwen3.8 27B: 50.5 (#44)

BenchmarkPhi 3 Mini 128k InstructQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Coding10391482
LMArena WebDev—1593
SciCode—46.6%
BigCodeBench Instruct29.6%—
BigCodeBench Complete40.6%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Phi 3 Mini 128k Instruct: —, Qwen3.8 27B: 32.9 (#57)

BenchmarkPhi 3 Mini 128k InstructQwen3.8 27B
APEX-Agents—47.5%

Reasoning Qwen3.8 27B leads

Phi 3 Mini 128k Instruct: 19.6 (#256), Qwen3.8 27B: 41.0 (#54)

BenchmarkPhi 3 Mini 128k InstructQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Hard Prompts10281460
ARC-AGI-2—42.4%
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

Phi 3 Mini 128k Instruct: 31.6 (#222), Qwen3.8 27B: 37.1 (#161)

BenchmarkPhi 3 Mini 128k InstructQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Math10891456
ProofBench—16%

Knowledge Qwen3.8 27B leads

Phi 3 Mini 128k Instruct: 26.8 (#254), Qwen3.8 27B: 41.6 (#109)

BenchmarkPhi 3 Mini 128k InstructQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Expert9841482

Multimodal Not comparable

Phi 3 Mini 128k Instruct: —, Qwen3.8 27B: 41.3 (#37)

BenchmarkPhi 3 Mini 128k InstructQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Vision—1271

Multilingual Qwen3.8 27B leads

Phi 3 Mini 128k Instruct: 25.2 (#285), Qwen3.8 27B: 53.7 (#60)

BenchmarkPhi 3 Mini 128k InstructQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Non-English10001430
LMArena Chinese10161504
LMArena French10391465
LMArena German10061438
LMArena Japanese8991384
LMArena Korean8561393
LMArena Russian10041415
LMArena Spanish10591448

Instruction Following Qwen3.8 27B leads

Phi 3 Mini 128k Instruct: 51.8 (#294), Qwen3.8 27B: 75.8 (#53)

BenchmarkPhi 3 Mini 128k InstructQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Instruction Following10231439

Long Context Qwen3.8 27B leads

Phi 3 Mini 128k Instruct: 30.4 (#289), Qwen3.8 27B: 44.3 (#70)

BenchmarkPhi 3 Mini 128k InstructQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Longer Query9961450

Writing & Preference Qwen3.8 27B leads

Phi 3 Mini 128k Instruct: 27.1 (#301), Qwen3.8 27B: 65.8 (#43)

BenchmarkPhi 3 Mini 128k InstructQwen3.8 27B
LMArena Text10501441
LMArena Creative Writing10241384
LMArena Multi-Turn9891441
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1671

Frequently asked questions

Is Phi 3 Mini 128k Instruct better than Qwen3.8 27B?

Qwen3.8 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.0 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.

Is Phi 3 Mini 128k Instruct or Qwen3.8 27B better for coding?

Qwen3.8 27B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.5 versus 28.8 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Phi 3 Mini 128k Instruct and Qwen3.8 27B share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Phi 3 Mini 128k Instruct has 19 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.8 27B has 31.

Related comparisons

Go deeper