CompareLLM.ai
Live
Leaderboard
Models
Compare
Best of & Stacks
Research & News
…
CompareLLM.ai
Precision Benchmarks

Programmatic, dated AI model benchmarks, head-to-head comparisons, and Stack Engine presets.

Daily ingest · 06:00 UTC

Analytics & Benchmarks

  • AI Model Leaderboard
  • Head-to-Head Compare Hub
  • Models Directory
  • Stack Engine Presets
  • Frontier Models
  • Open Weights Catalog

Guides & Intent Lists

  • Best LLM Lists (2026)
  • Best Coding LLM
  • Best Cheap LLM
  • Fastest Low-Latency LLM
  • Claude vs GPT Benchmark
  • What is Elo?
  • Methodology Guides
  • News & Dispatches

Transparency & API

  • Evaluation Methodology
  • Benchmark Changelog
  • Public JSON API
  • llms.txt Specification
  • Privacy Policy
  • Sign In / Account

© 2026 CompareLLM. Public benchmark data aggregated from Arena Elo, LiveBench, SWE-bench & OpenRouter.

Every score has a dated snapshot.

Theme:
Currency:
  1. Home
  2. Comparisons
  3. DeepSeek R1 vs Qwen3.8 27B

Pairwise benchmark snapshot · Aug 16, 2026

DeepSeek R1 vs Qwen3.8 27B benchmark

In this head-to-head showdown, Qwen3.8 27B delivers higher overall intelligence and human-preferred responses (Elo 1,398 vs 1,358), while DeepSeek R1 leads in SWE-bench software engineering benchmarks (65.2%), while Qwen3.8 27B is more budget-friendly at $0.4/1M per 1M output tokens. Review the complete breakdown below to determine which model best fits your performance and budget requirements.

Executive Comparison Verdict

Bottom Line: Qwen3.8 27B holds the advantage over DeepSeek R1 in overall benchmark performance and human evaluation rankings. Choose Qwen3.8 27B for demanding workloads, or review the breakdown below to compare coding and pricing metrics.
Share Analysis:
WhatsAppTelegramXLinkedInReddit

Verified Head-to-Head Advantage Breakdown

9 direct benchmark disciplines evaluated across capability, speed, and cost

DeepSeek R1 (2)Qwen3.8 27B (7)
DeepSeek R1
2 of 9 Wins
✓SWE-bench✓GPQA Diamond
Qwen3.8 27B
7 of 9 Wins
✓Preference Elo✓LiveBench✓Time to first token✓Output speed✓Input price✓Output price✓Context window
DeepSeek
Leads 2 of 9 metrics
DeepSeek R1

Open-weights reasoning model trained with large-scale RL.

Elo 1,358$2.19/1M out
Alibaba
Leads 7 of 9 metrics
Qwen3.8 27B

Alibaba open-weight 27B drop dated Aug 14 2026. Dense enough to self-host; not a frontier MoE.

27B DenseElo 1,398$0.4/1M out

DeepSeek R1 Thinking Depth & Cost Scaler

Model A

Simulate accuracy gains vs added response time & token cost

Mode: Medium (Full RL CoT)

Reasoning models “think before answering” by generating internal reasoning tokens. Higher effort improves math, coding, and logic accuracy, but increases response delay and token costs.

Thinking Delay
420 ms
Standard speed
Reasoning Depth
~2,800
Internal tokens
Cost / 1k Calls
$7.06
7.6× standard bill
Accuracy Boost
+6.5% accuracy
STEM & SWE-bench
Top Rival Showdowns for DeepSeek R1
All Matchups
Compare vs:vs Claude Opus 4.5vs GPT-5vs Gemini 3 Provs Grok 4.6vs Qwen 3 Max
Preference LeaderQwen3.8 27B Wins

Qwen3.8 27B

Δ 40 Arena Elo pts

Throughput LeaderQwen3.8 27B Wins

Qwen3.8 27B

152 tok/s

Value per Dollar LeaderQwen3.8 27B Wins

Qwen3.8 27B

$0.4 / 1M output

Capability Percentiles

Relative percentile scores computed across all active models in the benchmark catalog.

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Leaders Matchup Capability Radar

Comparing top Western standard models with China's leading frontier rival across 6 skill dimensions. Tap any spoke or dot to inspect.

Tap any node to inspect
Percentile 0–100
Head-to-Head Comparison

Overall Matchup Breakdown

Category wins across reasoning intelligence, generation speed, and token cost.

DeepSeek R1 (2)vsQwen3.8 27B (8)
DeepSeek R1: 2W (20%)Overall: Qwen3.8 27BQwen3.8 27B: 8W (80%)
← DeepSeek R1Qwen3.8 27B →
🏆Qwen3.8 27B(3/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy

Benchmark
DeepSeek R1vsQwen3.8 27B
Preference Elo
1,358vs1,398+40
Coding Elo
—vs1,422
SWE-bench
65.2%vs58.8%+6.4%
LiveBench
59%vs60.6%+1.6%
GPQA Diamond
79.8%vs73.4%+6.4%
DeepSeek R1: 2WQwen3.8 27B: 3W
🏆Qwen3.8 27B(2/2)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Benchmark
DeepSeek R1vsQwen3.8 27B
Output speed
62 tok/svs152 tok/s+90 tok/s
Time to first token
420 msvs140 ms+280 ms
DeepSeek R1: 0WQwen3.8 27B: 2W
🏆Qwen3.8 27B(3/3)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Benchmark
DeepSeek R1vsQwen3.8 27B
Output price
$2.19/1Mvs$0.4/1M+$1.79/1M
Input price
$0.55/1Mvs$0.1/1M+$0.45/1M
Context window
128kvs131k+3k
DeepSeek R1: 0WQwen3.8 27B: 3W

Side-by-Side Benchmark Matrix

Preference Elo+40
DeepSeek R11,358
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
Qwen3.8 27B1,398
seed-bootstrap · Aug 16, 2026
Coding Elo
DeepSeek R1—
Qwen3.8 27B1,422
seed-bootstrap · Aug 16, 2026
LiveBench+1.6%
DeepSeek R159%
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
Qwen3.8 27B60.6%
seed-bootstrap · Aug 16, 2026
SWE-bench+6.4%
DeepSeek R165.2%
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
Qwen3.8 27B58.8%
seed-bootstrap · Aug 16, 2026
GPQA Diamond+6.4%
DeepSeek R179.8%
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
Qwen3.8 27B73.4%
seed-bootstrap · Aug 16, 2026
Time to first token+280 ms
DeepSeek R1420 ms
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
Qwen3.8 27B140 ms
seed-bootstrap · Aug 16, 2026
Output speed+90 tok/s
DeepSeek R162 tok/s
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
Qwen3.8 27B152 tok/s
seed-bootstrap · Aug 16, 2026
Input price+$0.45/1M
DeepSeek R1$0.55/1M
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
Qwen3.8 27B$0.1/1M
seed-bootstrap · Aug 16, 2026
Output price+$1.79/1M
DeepSeek R1$2.19/1M
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
Qwen3.8 27B$0.4/1M
seed-bootstrap · Aug 16, 2026
Context window+3k
DeepSeek R1128k
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
Qwen3.8 27B131k
seed-bootstrap · Aug 16, 2026
BenchmarkDeepSeek R1Qwen3.8 27BAdvantage Delta
Preference Elo
1,358
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
1,398
seed-bootstrap · Aug 16, 2026
+40
Coding Elo—
1,422
seed-bootstrap · Aug 16, 2026
—
LiveBench
59%
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
60.6%
seed-bootstrap · Aug 16, 2026
+1.6%
SWE-bench
65.2%
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
58.8%
seed-bootstrap · Aug 16, 2026
+6.4%
GPQA Diamond
79.8%
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
73.4%
seed-bootstrap · Aug 16, 2026
+6.4%
Time to first token
420 ms
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
140 ms
seed-bootstrap · Aug 16, 2026
+280 ms
Output speed
62 tok/s
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
152 tok/s
seed-bootstrap · Aug 16, 2026
+90 tok/s
Input price
$0.55/1M
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
$0.1/1M
seed-bootstrap · Aug 16, 2026
+$0.45/1M
Output price
$2.19/1M
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
$0.4/1M
seed-bootstrap · Aug 16, 2026
+$1.79/1M
Context window
128k
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
131k
seed-bootstrap · Aug 16, 2026
+3k
Interactive Simulator (USD)

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Simulate monthly production API costs in USD (US Dollar).

Save up to 82% with Qwen3.8 27B
Monthly Volume50M tokens/mo
Quick Presets:
Token Ratio (In vs Out)70% In / 30% Out
RAG / Search (10% out)Coding / Chat (50% out)
DeepSeek R1$52.10 / mo
In: $19.25Out: $32.85
Qwen3.8 27B$9.50 / mo
In: $3.5Out: $6
Estimated Cost Delta

Qwen3.8 27B is estimated to save $42.60/month ($511/year).

Based on 50M tokens (30% gen)

Key Selection Recommendations

  • 1
    DeepSeek R1:Pick DeepSeek R1 when repo-level coding accuracy is the constraint.
  • 2
    Qwen3.8 27B:Pick Qwen3.8 27B when you are optimizing output cost.
  • 3
    Qwen3.8 27B:Pick Qwen3.8 27B when time-to-first-token matters more than peak Elo.

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsDeepSeek R1

Higher SWE-bench (65.2%).

High-volume chatQwen3.8 27B

Lower output list price ($0.4/1M).

Voice / low-latency UIQwen3.8 27B

Lower TTFT (140 ms).

Long-document RAGQwen3.8 27B

Larger window (131k).

Screenshots / visionQwen3.8 27B

Qwen3.8 27B is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Target WorkloadRecommended PickEvaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agentsDeepSeek R1Higher SWE-bench (65.2%).
High-volume chatQwen3.8 27BLower output list price ($0.4/1M).
Voice / low-latency UIQwen3.8 27BLower TTFT (140 ms).
Long-document RAGQwen3.8 27BLarger window (131k).
Screenshots / visionQwen3.8 27BQwen3.8 27B is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

View all news
launchAug 14, 2026

Qwen3.8 27B (Aug 14): dense enough to self-host, not a frontier MoE

Alibaba open-weight 27B drop. Local/open-weight lists should see it. It will not win frontier-agents.

launchJan 20, 2025

DeepSeek R1 stays as the open-weights RL baseline

Jan 2025 reasoning model. Still searched. V4 Pro is the newer DeepSeek buy.

Community Sentiment

Cast Your Matchup Vote

0 total votes

Community Discussions (0)

Sign in to cast your verified vote, bookmark models, and participate in benchmark discussions.Sign In to Post

No comments posted on this matchup yet. Be the first to share an evaluation note!

Social Share Card Preview

Dynamic OpenGraph banner generated at /compare/deepseek-r1-vs-qwen-3-8-27b/opengraph-image

Save PNG

CompareLLM AI Matrix

Verified Head-to-Head Telemetry

LIVE BENCHMARK
VS
DeepSeek

DeepSeek R1

Elo 1,358
SWE-bench65.2%
Speed (tok/s)62 tok/s
Input / 1M Tokens$0.55/1M
Output / 1M Tokens$2.19/1M
Alibaba

Qwen3.8 27B

Elo 1,398
SWE-bench58.8%
Speed (tok/s)152 tok/s
Input / 1M Tokens$0.1/1M
Output / 1M Tokens$0.4/1M

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, DeepSeek R1 or Qwen3.8 27B?
Qwen3.8 27B has the higher preference Elo in our latest snapshot (1,398). “Better” still depends on coding, price, and latency — see the table.
Which is better at coding, DeepSeek R1 or Qwen3.8 27B?
DeepSeek R1 leads SWE-bench at 65.2% vs 58.8%. SWE-bench is one harness, not your repo.
Which is cheaper to run in production?
Qwen3.8 27B output tokens are $0.4/1M versus $2.19/1M. Input prices and retry rates still move the real bill.
Which is faster, DeepSeek R1 or Qwen3.8 27B?
Qwen3.8 27B has the lower time-to-first-token (140 ms vs 420 ms). Tokens/sec is a separate column if you care about long completions.
Which has the larger context window?
Qwen3.8 27B accepts 131k tokens versus 128k.
Can I self-host either model?
Both DeepSeek R1 and Qwen3.8 27B are marked open-weights. Hosting cost is not in this table.
Are these scores from CompareLLM’s own evals?
No. V1 aggregates public leaderboards (and optional first-party latency pings). Each cell names its source and date. Read /methodology.
What does preference Elo mean on this page?
Preference Elo is a crowd vote from LMArena / Arena. People see two hidden answers and pick the one they like more. The model that wins more often gets a higher Elo. That means people preferred it — not that it passed a school test. It is not SWE-bench, not accuracy, and not a number we invent. DeepSeek R1 and Qwen3.8 27B Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.

Related news

  • launch · Aug 14, 2026

    Qwen3.8 27B (Aug 14): dense enough to self-host, not a frontier MoE

  • launch · Jan 20, 2025

    DeepSeek R1 stays as the open-weights RL baseline

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons

All DeepSeek R1 matchups →|All Qwen3.8 27B matchups →
DeepSeek R1 vs DeepSeek V3 (previous deepseek)DeepSeek R1 vs DeepSeek V4 Pro (next deepseek)DeepSeek V4 Flash vs Qwen3.8 27BQwen QwQ 32B vs Qwen3.8 27BDeepSeek V4 Pro vs Qwen3.8 27BDeepSeek Coder V2 vs DeepSeek R1