Qwen3.8 27B vs GPT-5.1

At a Glance

Compare
GPT-5.1OpenAI
Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency
IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v2.5#30 of 4654.0 score · 2/3 sources · provisional · missing ARC-AGI-2 · full-core range 36.0–69.4#37 of 4625.7 score · 2/3 sources · provisional · missing LiveBench · full-core range 17.1–50.5
CostLower is better · Published-token output estimate#16 of 44$0.072 per LiveBench caseUnrankedNot in the 44-model eligible cohort
EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.5#17 of 3854.8 score · 2/3 sources · provisional · missing ARC-AGI-2 · full-core range 45.8–62.5UnrankedNot in the 38-model eligible cohort
Pricing and Limits
Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$0.20Deepinfra · Sep 21, 2026$1.25Openai · Sep 3, 2026
Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$2.50Deepinfra · Sep 21, 2026$10.00Openai · Sep 3, 2026
Context windowMaximum documented tokens262K400K
Model facts checkedAug 28, 2026View model evidence →Sep 3, 2026View model evidence →

Token prices are the lowest available sourced USD rates; input and output may use different providers. Cost ranking estimates output spend on LiveBench, not a full request bill. Ranking methodology →

Available Benchmarks

All benchmark results →
BenchmarkQwen3.8-27BGPT-5.1
LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader1,439.27100% of row best · rating · qwen3.8-27b; 95% CI [1432.84410050, 1445.69542028]; votes 10697; rank 681,422.5799% of row best · rating · gpt-5.1; 95% CI [1418.95842118, 1426.18777801]; votes 42982; rank 100
LMArena Vision Arenavision-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader1,272.12100% of row best · rating · qwen3.8-27b; 95% CI [1262.21853873, 1282.01179703]; votes 4577; rank 351,235.0897% of row best · rating · gpt-5.1; 95% CI [1227.35514387, 1242.80648733]; votes 10205; rank 65
Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above2 benchmark winsNo overall winner0 benchmark winsNo overall winner

Third-party benchmark Only like-for-like primary-publisher results are shown; raw scores, relative scores, configuration, and token spend remain visible.

Side-by-Side Facts

FieldQwen3.8-27BGPT-5.1
DeveloperQwenOpenAI
FamilyQwen3 8 27bGpt 5 1
ModelQwen3.8-27BGPT-5.1
VersionQwen3.8-27BGPT-5.1
Lifecycleactiveactive
ReleasedUnknown2025-11-13
Knowledge cutoffUnknown2024-09-30
Input modalitiesText, ImageText, Image
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window262K400K
Total parameters27.8BUnknown
Active parametersUnknownUnknown
Licenseapache-2.0Unknown
Open weightsYesNo
API availableYesYes
Self-hostableYesNo
Provider accessDeepinfra (Standard), Hugging Face (Standard), Openrouter (Standard)Openai (Standard), Openrouter (Standard)
Capabilitieschat, generation, reasoning, toolschat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools

Qwen3.8 27B Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningtools
Serving providers3
Canonical IDQwen/Qwen3.8-27B

GPT-5.1 Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningstructured outputstools
Serving providers2
Canonical IDopenai/gpt-5.1

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

Qwen3.8 27B vs GPT-5.1 FAQs

Is Qwen3.8 27B or GPT-5.1 better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Qwen3.8 27B and GPT-5.1, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3.8 27B or GPT-5.1?+

Qwen3.8 27B is $0.20 and GPT-5.1 is $1.25 per million tokens, so Qwen3.8 27B is cheaper on this metric. Qwen3.8 27B is $2.50 and GPT-5.1 is $10.00 per million tokens, so Qwen3.8 27B is cheaper on this metric.

Which has a larger context window, Qwen3.8 27B or GPT-5.1?+

GPT-5.1 has the larger sourced context window. Qwen3.8 27B supports 262K and GPT-5.1 supports 400K.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Qwen3.8 27B or GPT-5.1?+

There is no overall benchmark winner: An overall winner requires at least two decisive benchmarks from at least two original publishers.

Can Qwen3.8 27B or GPT-5.1 be self-hosted?+

Qwen3.8 27B is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Qwen3.8 27B is open weight; GPT-5.1 is not marked open weight.

Can Qwen3.8 27B and GPT-5.1 understand images?+

Qwen3.8 27B is documented with image input; GPT-5.1 is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.

Which can generate longer answers, Qwen3.8 27B or GPT-5.1?+

Qwen3.8 27B has the larger sourced maximum output: Qwen3.8 27B supports 131K and GPT-5.1 supports 128K output tokens.

Do Qwen3.8 27B and GPT-5.1 support reasoning and tool use?+

Qwen3.8 27B: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. GPT-5.1: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, Qwen3.8 27B or GPT-5.1?+

Qwen3.8 27B has 3 sourced provider routes; GPT-5.1 has 2, so Qwen3.8 27B has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, Qwen3.8 27B or GPT-5.1?+

There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.

Send Feedback