# Qwen3.8 27B vs Wizardlm 70b

> Qwen3.8 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.3 to 32.4 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/qwen3-8-27b-vs-wizardlm-70b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 12

## Summary

- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen3.8 27B scores higher in 7 categories and Wizardlm 70b in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen3.8 27B leads 65.9 to 34.9.

## Snapshot

| | Qwen3.8 27B | Wizardlm 70b |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Microsoft |
| Noometry Index | 45.3 | 32.4 |
| Rank | 64 | 245 |
| Context | 262K | — |
| Input $/M | $0.99 | — |
| Output $/M | $1.49 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Qwen3.8 27B: 50.3 (#42)
- Wizardlm 70b: 30.9 (#280)

| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 27B | Wizardlm 70b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1487 | 1081 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1592 | — |
| SciCode | 46.6% | — |

## Reasoning

- Qwen3.8 27B: 31.5 (#71)
- Wizardlm 70b: 19.8 (#231)

| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 27B | Wizardlm 70b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1459 | 1079 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 54.5% | — |
| CritPt | 5.4% | — |
| DTBench | 88% | — |
| LMCA | 41.4% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 45% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 149.38 | — |

## Math

- Qwen3.8 27B: 35.7 (#139)
- Wizardlm 70b: 29.7 (#216)

| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 27B | Wizardlm 70b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1453 | 1116 |
| ProofBench | 16% | — |

## Knowledge

- Qwen3.8 27B: 40.9 (#105)
- Wizardlm 70b: —

| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 27B | Wizardlm 70b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1482 | — |

## Multimodal

- Qwen3.8 27B: 40.5 (#36)
- Wizardlm 70b: —

| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 27B | Wizardlm 70b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1270 | — |

## Multilingual

- Qwen3.8 27B: 54.0 (#54)
- Wizardlm 70b: 29.8 (#260)

| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 27B | Wizardlm 70b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1431 | 1078 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1504 | 1052 |
| LMArena German | 1435 | 1083 |
| LMArena Russian | 1421 | 1155 |
| LMArena French | 1468 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1392 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1389 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1444 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Qwen3.8 27B: 75.8 (#54)
- Wizardlm 70b: 56.5 (#268)

| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 27B | Wizardlm 70b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1436 | 1093 |

## Long Context

- Qwen3.8 27B: 44.3 (#66)
- Wizardlm 70b: 33.3 (#258)

| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 27B | Wizardlm 70b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1448 | 1097 |

## Writing & Preference

- Qwen3.8 27B: 65.9 (#41)
- Wizardlm 70b: 34.9 (#264)

| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 27B | Wizardlm 70b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1441 | 1120 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1382 | 1149 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1443 | 1108 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1671 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Qwen3.8 27B better than Wizardlm 70b?

Qwen3.8 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.3 to 32.4 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Qwen3.8 27B or Wizardlm 70b better for coding?

Qwen3.8 27B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.3 versus 30.9 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Qwen3.8 27B and Wizardlm 70b share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen3.8 27B has 28 scored results on Noometry and Wizardlm 70b has 12.