# Pixtral Large vs Qwen3.8 27B

> Qwen3.8 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.3 to 31.7 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/pixtral-large-vs-qwen3-8-27b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 2

## Summary

- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Pixtral Large scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.8 27B in 3 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen3.8 27B leads 65.9 to 32.9.
- Qwen3.8 27B is cheaper at $0.99 / $1.49 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $6 for Pixtral Large.
- Qwen3.8 27B accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 128K.

## Snapshot

| | Pixtral Large | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Mistral AI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 31.7 | 45.3 |
| Rank | 257 | 64 |
| Context | 128K | 262K |
| Input $/M | $2 | $0.99 |
| Output $/M | $6 | $1.49 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Pixtral Large: —
- Qwen3.8 27B: 50.3 (#42)

| Benchmark | Pixtral Large | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1592 |
| SciCode | — | 46.6% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1487 |

## Reasoning

- Pixtral Large: 20.9 (#208)
- Qwen3.8 27B: 31.5 (#71)

| Benchmark | Pixtral Large | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 54.5% |
| CritPt | — | 5.4% |
| EnigmaEval | 0.8% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1459 |
| DTBench | — | 88% |
| LMCA | — | 41.4% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 45% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 149.38 |

## Math

- Pixtral Large: —
- Qwen3.8 27B: 35.7 (#139)

| Benchmark | Pixtral Large | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | — | 16% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1453 |

## Knowledge

- Pixtral Large: —
- Qwen3.8 27B: 40.9 (#105)

| Benchmark | Pixtral Large | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | — | 1482 |

## Multimodal

- Pixtral Large: 30.0 (#105)
- Qwen3.8 27B: 40.5 (#36)

| Benchmark | Pixtral Large | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1089 | 1270 |

## Multilingual

- Pixtral Large: —
- Qwen3.8 27B: 54.0 (#54)

| Benchmark | Pixtral Large | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1431 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1504 |
| LMArena French | — | 1468 |
| LMArena German | — | 1435 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1392 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1389 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1421 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1444 |

## Instruction Following

- Pixtral Large: —
- Qwen3.8 27B: 75.8 (#54)

| Benchmark | Pixtral Large | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1436 |

## Long Context

- Pixtral Large: —
- Qwen3.8 27B: 44.3 (#66)

| Benchmark | Pixtral Large | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1448 |

## Writing & Preference

- Pixtral Large: 32.9 (#273)
- Qwen3.8 27B: 65.9 (#41)

| Benchmark | Pixtral Large | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 988 | 1671 |
| LMArena Text | — | 1441 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1382 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1443 |

## FAQ

### Is Pixtral Large better than Qwen3.8 27B?

Qwen3.8 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.3 to 31.7 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, Pixtral Large or Qwen3.8 27B?

Qwen3.8 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.99 per million input tokens and $1.49 per million output tokens; Pixtral Large lists at $2 and $6.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.8 27B does, with 262K tokens against 128K.

### How many benchmarks do Pixtral Large and Qwen3.8 27B share?

2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Pixtral Large has 3 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.8 27B has 28.