Qwen3.8 27B — Benchmarks
Benchmark scores for Qwen3.8 27B aggregated from public leaderboards (21 boards), with how it ranks among open models and how it compares with its nearest neighbours. See hardware requirements for what you need to run it.
- #11 of 100 open models
- #1 of 35 that fit 24 GB
- 21 boards · updated Oct 2026
- 100 = average open model
- Hardware requirements →
Qwen3.8 27B reasoning benchmarks
Multi-step logic and problem-solving — can the model think through a hard problem rather than recall an answer.
80.0
median 82.7open leader 90.7
Overall best: GPT 6 Astra Max 92.7
44th percentile · #11 of 19 open · #55 of 70 all
Independent42.4%
42.4%
median 11.8%open leader 72.9%
Overall best: GPT 6 Astra Max 95.0%
72nd percentile · #6 of 19 open · #91 of 222 all
IndependentEpoch AI ·
87.5%
87.5%
median 65.3%open leader 94.5%
Overall best: Claude Fable 5 (xhigh) 98.5%
72nd percentile · #6 of 19 open · #77 of 232 all
IndependentEpoch AI ·
47.5%
47.5%
median 40.2%open leader 59.5%
Overall best: Gemini 4 Argon (unspecified) 82.4%
73rd percentile · #5 of 16 open · #32 of 54 all
Lab-reportedEpoch AI ·
5.4%
5.4%
median 1.1%open leader 26.6%
Overall best: GPT 5.6 Sol Max 32.3%
78th percentile · #15 of 66 open · #123 of 219 all
Lab-reportedEpoch AI ·
88.0%
88.0%
median 67.7%open leader 93.9%
Overall best: Claude Opus 5.5 Max 98.9%
88th percentile · #9 of 68 open · #80 of 214 all
Lab-reportedEpoch AI ·
80.0
median 78.8open leader 90.7
Overall best: Gemini 4 Argon 95.1
64th percentile · #6 of 15 open · #38 of 48 all
Independent41.4%
41.4%
median 24.7%open leader 55.5%
Overall best: Claude Opus 5.5 Max 68.2%
89th percentile · #7 of 54 open · #85 of 176 all
Lab-reportedEpoch AI ·
Other results (2)· leaderboard-only, not part of the llmrun Score
Qwen3.8 27B coding benchmarks
Writing, editing, and fixing real code — measured by whether the resulting program actually runs and passes tests.
75.7
75.7
median 75.0open leader 81.5
Overall best: Claude Sonnet 5.5 Max 91.4
56th percentile · #9 of 19 open · #51 of 70 all
Independent46.6%
46.6%
median 38.7%open leader 60.9%
Overall best: Claude Opus 5.5 Max 66.9%
72nd percentile · #19 of 66 open · #131 of 207 all
Lab-reportedEpoch AI ·
86.8
median 65.5open leader
Overall best: Claude Fable 5 98.3
top · #1 of 15 open · #15 of 48 all
Independent27.9
median 27.1open leader 47.5
Overall best: Claude Opus 5.5 85.0
57th percentile · #7 of 15 open · #33 of 48 all
Independent45.0%
median 45.0%open leader 95.0%
50th percentile · #7 of 13 open · #20 of 28 all
Lab-reportedEpoch AI ·
Other results (2)· leaderboard-only, not part of the llmrun Score
Qwen3.8 27B math benchmarks
Symbolic and quantitative problem-solving, from competition math to multi-step calculation.
Qwen3.8 27B knowledge benchmarks
Breadth and depth of factual knowledge across many subjects, paired with the reasoning to apply it.
59.4
median 70.1open leader 85.3
Overall best: Claude Opus 5 88.9
21st percentile · #12 of 15 open · #40 of 48 all
Independent
Qwen3.8 27B instruction following benchmarks
How precisely a model obeys explicit, verifiable instructions — format, length, and content constraints — and, more broadly, how much people prefer its responses head-to-head in blind human voting.
1437.8
1437.8
median 1321.5open leader 1487.1
Overall best: Gemini 4 Argon (High) 1523.9
89th percentile · #22 of 187 open · #99 of 405 all
ArenaArena ·
Score vs VRAM in the 24 GB tier
- Qwen3.8 27B
- Other models
- Best Score for its VRAM
#1 of 35 that fit 24 GB
Each dot is a model at the best quant that fits a 24 GB GPU. The line joins the models with the best Score for their VRAM; a dot below it is beaten by a model that needs no more memory.
Full 24 GB ranking →Qwen3.8 27B vs its neighbours
Same boards for the nearest open models per llmrun Score and the best model that fits 24 GB. The highest score in each row is marked.
| Board | Qwen3.8 27Bthis model | Qwen3.6 27Bnearest by ScoreQ4_K_M · 18 GB | Gemma 4 31B ITnearest by ScoreQ4_K_M · 22 GB | Qwen3.6 35B A3Bnearest by ScoreQ4_K_M · 22 GB |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| llmrun Score | 122.1 | 111.2 | 106.8 | 106.8 |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 80.0 | 70.3 | — | — |
| CritPt | 5.4% | 0.9% | 1.4% | 0.3% |
| DTBench | 88.0% | 78.1% | 82.7% | 73.9% |
| LiveBench 2026 Reasoning | 80.0 | — | 68.3 | — |
| LMCA | 41.4% | 34.5% | 39.3% | 29.7% |
| LiveBench Coding | 75.7 | 71.8 | — | — |
| SciCode | 46.6% | 37.3% | 45.5% | 36.6% |
| LiveBench 2026 Coding | 86.8 | — | 49.0 | — |
| LiveBench 2026 Long-Horizon | 27.9 | — | 13.3 | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 45.0% | — | 30.6% | 44.4% |
| LiveBench Math | 86.2 | 79.9 | — | — |
| LiveBench 2026 Research | 59.4 | — | 44.4 | — |
| LMArena Text | 1437.8 | — | 1452.2 | — |
| Compare head to head | Compare | Compare | Compare |
Scores aggregated from public benchmark sources (LiveBench: 10 boards, Epoch AI: 9 boards, Arena: 2 boards) — each linked from the benchmark pages. llmrun does not run these benchmarks. Percentiles and ranks are among open models in the llmrun catalogue; the median and leader marks refer to the same field.