# Qwen3.8 27B vs Wizardlm 13b

> Qwen3.8 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.0 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/qwen3-8-27b-vs-wizardlm-13b
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 10

## Summary

- They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen3.8 27B scores higher in 7 categories and Wizardlm 13b in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen3.8 27B leads 65.8 to 30.5.

## Snapshot

| | Qwen3.8 27B | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Microsoft |
| Noometry Index | 46.0 | 31.4 |
| Rank | 68 | 274 |
| Context | 262K | — |
| Input $/M | $0.04 | — |
| Output $/M | $2.30 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Qwen3.8 27B: 50.5 (#44)
- Wizardlm 13b: 30.1 (#298)

| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 27B | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1482 | 1035 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1593 | — |
| SciCode | 46.6% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Qwen3.8 27B: 32.9 (#57)
- Wizardlm 13b: —

| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 27B | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 47.5% | — |

## Reasoning

- Qwen3.8 27B: 41.0 (#54)
- Wizardlm 13b: 19.4 (#259)

| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 27B | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1460 | 1018 |
| 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: 37.1 (#161)
- Wizardlm 13b: 30.2 (#238)

| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 27B | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1456 | 1017 |
| ProofBench | 16% | — |

## Knowledge

- Qwen3.8 27B: 41.6 (#109)
- Wizardlm 13b: —

| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 27B | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1482 | — |

## Multimodal

- Qwen3.8 27B: 41.3 (#37)
- Wizardlm 13b: —

| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 27B | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1271 | — |

## Multilingual

- Qwen3.8 27B: 53.7 (#60)
- Wizardlm 13b: 27.1 (#277)

| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 27B | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1430 | 1034 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1504 | 1023 |
| LMArena French | 1465 | — |
| LMArena German | 1438 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1384 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1393 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1415 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1448 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Qwen3.8 27B: 75.8 (#53)
- Wizardlm 13b: 53.5 (#285)

| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 27B | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1439 | 1048 |

## Long Context

- Qwen3.8 27B: 44.3 (#70)
- Wizardlm 13b: 32.0 (#273)

| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 27B | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1450 | 1054 |

## Writing & Preference

- Qwen3.8 27B: 65.8 (#43)
- Wizardlm 13b: 30.5 (#287)

| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 27B | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1441 | 1077 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1384 | 1091 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1441 | 1047 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1671 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Qwen3.8 27B better than Wizardlm 13b?

Qwen3.8 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.0 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Qwen3.8 27B or Wizardlm 13b better for coding?

Qwen3.8 27B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.5 versus 30.1 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Qwen3.8 27B and Wizardlm 13b share?

10 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen3.8 27B has 31 scored results on Noometry and Wizardlm 13b has 10.