Qwen3.8 27B vs GPT-5.4 Nano

At a Glance

Compare
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#42 of 4614.7 score · 3/3 sources · complete
CostLower is better · Published-token output estimate#16 of 44$0.072 per LiveBench case#14 of 44$0.058 per LiveBench case
EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.5#17 of 3854.8 score · 2/3 sources · provisional · missing ARC-AGI-2 · full-core range 45.8–62.5#37 of 3837.5 score · 3/3 sources · complete
Pricing and Limits
Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$0.20Deepinfra · Sep 21, 2026$0.20Openai · Sep 3, 2026
Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$2.50Deepinfra · Sep 21, 2026$1.25Openai · 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-5.4 Nano
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 681,372.8695% of row best · rating · gpt-5.4-nano-high; 95% CI [1369.01237938, 1376.71496043]; votes 58424; rank 167
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 351,197.7394% of row best · rating · gpt-5.4-nano-high; 95% CI [1191.19602204, 1204.26778242]; votes 23906; rank 80
LiveBench2026-06-25 · overall · leader78.02100% of row best · percent · qwen3.8-27b · 28,740 output tokens / case75.2796% of row best · percent · gpt-5.4-nano-xhigh · 46,179 output tokens / case
Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above3 benchmark winsOverall lead0 benchmark wins

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-5.4 Nano
DeveloperQwenOpenAI
FamilyQwen3 8 27bGpt 5 4
ModelQwen3.8-27BGPT-5.4 Nano
VersionQwen3.8-27BGPT-5.4 Nano
Lifecycleactiveactive
ReleasedUnknown2026-03-17
Knowledge cutoffUnknown2025-08-31
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-5.4 Nano Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningstructured outputstools
Serving providers2
Canonical IDopenai/gpt-5.4-nano

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

Qwen3.8 27B vs GPT-5.4 Nano FAQs

Is Qwen3.8 27B or GPT-5.4 Nano better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Qwen3.8 27B and GPT-5.4 Nano, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3.8 27B or GPT-5.4 Nano?+

Qwen3.8 27B is $0.20 and GPT-5.4 Nano is $0.20 per million tokens, so they are tied on this metric. Qwen3.8 27B is $2.50 and GPT-5.4 Nano is $1.25 per million tokens, so GPT-5.4 Nano is cheaper on this metric.

Which has a larger context window, Qwen3.8 27B or GPT-5.4 Nano?+

GPT-5.4 Nano has the larger sourced context window. Qwen3.8 27B supports 262K and GPT-5.4 Nano supports 400K.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Qwen3.8 27B or GPT-5.4 Nano?+

Qwen3.8 27B leads the current overall benchmark count. The result uses 3 protocol-matched benchmarks from 2 publishers; it is not a universal quality score.

Can Qwen3.8 27B or GPT-5.4 Nano 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-5.4 Nano is not marked open weight.

Can Qwen3.8 27B and GPT-5.4 Nano understand images?+

Qwen3.8 27B is documented with image input; GPT-5.4 Nano is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.

Which can generate longer answers, Qwen3.8 27B or GPT-5.4 Nano?+

Qwen3.8 27B has the larger sourced maximum output: Qwen3.8 27B supports 131K and GPT-5.4 Nano supports 128K output tokens.

Do Qwen3.8 27B and GPT-5.4 Nano support reasoning and tool use?+

Qwen3.8 27B: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. GPT-5.4 Nano: 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-5.4 Nano?+

Qwen3.8 27B has 3 sourced provider routes; GPT-5.4 Nano has 2, so Qwen3.8 27B has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, Qwen3.8 27B or GPT-5.4 Nano?+

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