Qwen3.8 27B vs Helix 02

At a Glance

Compare
Helix 02Figure
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 36.0–69.4UnrankedNot in the 46-model eligible cohort
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
Context windowMaximum documented tokens262KNot reported
Model facts checkedAug 28, 2026View model evidence →Aug 29, 2026View model evidence →
Different Model RolesThese models do not share a sourced market category. Their primary-source facts remain comparable below, while performance claims require matched evidence.

Available Benchmarks

All benchmark results →
No Protocol-Matched Benchmark Yet.Results appear here only when both models share the same benchmark version, metric, evaluation protocol, and evidence class.

Side-by-Side Facts

FieldQwen3.8-27BHelix 02
DeveloperQwenFigure
FamilyQwen3 8 27bHelix
ModelQwen3.8-27BHelix 02
VersionQwen3.8-27B02
Lifecycleactiveactive
ReleasedUnknown2026-01-05
Knowledge cutoffUnknownUnknown
Input modalitiesText, ImageText, Image, Robot state
Output modalitiesTextRobot action
Context window262KUnknown
Total parameters27.8BUnknown
Active parametersUnknownUnknown
Licenseapache-2.0Unknown
Open weightsYesNo
API availableYesNo
Self-hostableYesNo
Provider accessDeepinfra (Standard), Hugging Face (Standard), Openrouter (Standard)Unknown
Capabilitieschat, generation, reasoning, toolsdexterous-manipulation, long-horizon-control, tactile-control, whole-body-control
Robotics model typeUnknownVision-language-action model
Action representationUnknownFull-body joint targets
Control architectureUnknownSemantic reasoning, visuomotor policy, and kHz whole-body controller
Inference locationUnknownOn device
Native control rate (Hz)UnknownUnknown
Supported embodimentsUnknownFigure 03
Training dataUnknownFigure reports more than 1,000 hours of human motion data plus sim-to-real reinforcement learning for its whole-body controller.

Qwen3.8 27B Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningtools
Model typeUnknown
InferenceUnknown
Action representationUnknown
Supported embodimentsUnknown
Canonical IDQwen/Qwen3.8-27B

Helix 02 Capabilities

dexterous-manipulationlong-horizon-controltactile-controlwhole-body-control
Model typeVision-language-action model
InferenceOn device
Action representationFull-body joint targets
Supported embodiments1
Canonical IDfigure/helix-02

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

Qwen3.8 27B vs Helix 02 FAQs

Is Qwen3.8 27B or Helix 02 better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Qwen3.8 27B and Helix 02, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3.8 27B or Helix 02?+

Only Qwen3.8 27B has a directly sourced input price: $0.20 per million tokens. Only Qwen3.8 27B has a directly sourced output price: $2.50 per million tokens.

Which has a larger context window, Qwen3.8 27B or Helix 02?+

Neither model has a larger sourced context window in this comparison. Qwen3.8 27B is 262K and Helix 02 is —.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Qwen3.8 27B or Helix 02?+

There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.

Can Qwen3.8 27B or Helix 02 be self-hosted?+

Qwen3.8 27B is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Qwen3.8 27B is open weight; Helix 02 is not marked open weight.

Can Qwen3.8 27B and Helix 02 understand images?+

Qwen3.8 27B is documented with image input; Helix 02 is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.

Which can generate longer answers, Qwen3.8 27B or Helix 02?+

Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Qwen3.8 27B is 131K and Helix 02 is —.

Do Qwen3.8 27B and Helix 02 support reasoning and tool use?+

Qwen3.8 27B: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Helix 02: image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, Qwen3.8 27B or Helix 02?+

Qwen3.8 27B has 3 sourced provider routes; Helix 02 has 0, so Qwen3.8 27B has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, Qwen3.8 27B or Helix 02?+

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