Pairwise benchmark snapshot · Aug 16, 2026

DeepSeek V3 vs Qwen3.8 27B benchmark

Name: DeepSeek V3 vs Qwen3.8 27B AI benchmark comparison
Creator: CompareLLM
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

This page compares DeepSeek V3 (DeepSeek) and Qwen3.8 27B (Alibaba) using the latest snapshots we have as of Aug 16, 2026. On preference Elo, Qwen3.8 27B is ahead by 88 points (1,398 vs 1,310; seed-bootstrap (Aug 16, 2026)). On SWE-bench coding, Qwen3.8 27B resolves 58.8% versus 48.6% (seed-bootstrap (Aug 16, 2026)). Qwen3.8 27B streams faster (152 tok/s) while DeepSeek V3 is the cheaper output token ($1.03/1M). Qwen3.8 27B has the larger context window (262k tokens). Every cell below is a dated snapshot from a named public source — we do not invent missing scores, and we do not run SWE-bench ourselves.

Share Analysis:

WhatsApp Telegram X / Post LinkedIn Reddit

DeepSeek

DeepSeek V3

Prior DeepSeek flagship. Baseline for v3 vs v4.

Elo 1,310$1.0287/1M out

Alibaba

Qwen3.8 27B

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

Elo 1,398$3.1999999999999997/1M out

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Instant pairwise benchmark recalculation across 400+ LLMs

Model A

Model B

Quick vs:vs Claude Opus 4.5 vs Claude Opus 4.6 vs Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Claude 3.7 Sonnet

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Matchup Breakdown

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Category wins across intelligence, speed, and pricing efficiency.

DeepSeek V3 (2)vsQwen3.8 27B (8)

DeepSeek V3: 2W (20%)Overall: Qwen3.8 27BQwen3.8 27B: 8W (80%)

← DeepSeek V3Qwen3.8 27B →

Qwen3.8 27B (5/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

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

Preference Elo

1,310vs1,398

Coding Elo

—vs1,422

SWE-bench

48.6%vs58.8%

LiveBench

55.4%vs60.6%

GPQA Diamond

59.1%vs73.4%

DeepSeek V3: 0WQwen3.8 27B: 5W

Qwen3.8 27B (2/2)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Output speed

66 tok/svs152 tok/s

Time to first token

380 msvs140 ms

DeepSeek V3: 0WQwen3.8 27B: 2W

DeepSeek V3 (2/3)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Output price

$1.03/1Mvs$3.2/1M

Input price

$0.26/1Mvs$0.45/1M

Context window

164kvs262k

DeepSeek V3: 2WQwen3.8 27B: 1W

Capability Matchup Radar

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Each spoke is a skill. Farther from the center is better (0–100th percentile). Tap any dot to inspect details.

Tap any node to inspect

Percentile 0–100

Dimensional AdvantageQwen3.8 27B 5/6

Preference Elo

Qwen3.8 27B

88 pts advantage

Throughput Speed

Qwen3.8 27B

86 tok/s faster

Price Efficiency

DeepSeek V3

$2.17/1M cheaper

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

—

Elo

High is better

1,310

EloHigh is better

1,398+7%

Code Elo

High is better

—

Code EloHigh is better

1,422

LiveBench

High is better

55.4%

LiveBenchHigh is better

60.6%+9%

SWE-bench

High is better

48.6%

SWE-benchHigh is better

58.8%+21%

GPQA

High is better

59.1%

GPQAHigh is better

73.4%+24%

TTFT

Low is better

380 ms

TTFTLow is better

140 ms+171%

Speed

High is better

66 tok/s

SpeedHigh is better

152 tok/s+130%

In $

Low is better

+75%$0.26/1M

In $Low is better

$0.45/1M

Out $

Low is better

+211%$1.03/1M

Out $Low is better

$3.2/1M

Context

High is better

164k

ContextHigh is better

262k+60%

Interactive Simulator

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Simulate monthly production API costs based on published $/1M tokens.

Save up to 62% with DeepSeek V3

Monthly Volume50M tokens/mo

Quick Presets:

Token Ratio (In vs Out)70% In / 30% Out

RAG / Search (10% out)Coding / Chat (50% out)

DeepSeek V3$24.44 / mo

In: $9.01Out: $15.43

Qwen3.8 27B$63.75 / mo

In: $15.75Out: $48.00

Estimated Cost Delta

DeepSeek V3 is estimated to save $39.31/month ($472/year).

Based on 50M tokens (30% gen)

Key Selection Recommendations

1
Qwen3.8 27B:Pick Qwen3.8 27B when repo-level coding accuracy is the constraint.
2
DeepSeek V3:Pick DeepSeek V3 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 agentsQwen3.8 27B

Higher SWE-bench (58.8%).

High-volume chatDeepSeek V3

Lower output list price ($1.03/1M).

Voice / low-latency UIQwen3.8 27B

Lower TTFT (140 ms).

Long-document RAGQwen3.8 27B

Larger window (262k).

Screenshots / visionQwen3.8 27B

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

Target Workload	Recommended Pick	Evaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agents	Qwen3.8 27B	Higher SWE-bench (58.8%).
High-volume chat	DeepSeek V3	Lower output list price ($1.03/1M).
Voice / low-latency UI	Qwen3.8 27B	Lower TTFT (140 ms).
Long-document RAG	Qwen3.8 27B	Larger window (262k).
Screenshots / vision	Qwen3.8 27B	Qwen3.8 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.

Community Sentiment

Cast Your Matchup Vote

0 total votes

Community Discussions (0)

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

Share card

The real PNG is generated at /compare/deepseek-v3-vs-qwen-3-8-27b/opengraph-image for crawlers.

PNG

CompareLLM Matrix

Verified head-to-head card

LIVE

DeepSeek

DeepSeek V3

Elo 1,310

LiveBench55.4%

SWE-bench48.6%

Speed66 tok/s

Output cost$1.03/1M

Alibaba

Qwen3.8 27B

Elo 1,398

LiveBench60.6%

SWE-bench58.8%

Speed152 tok/s

Output cost$3.2/1M

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, DeepSeek V3 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 V3 or Qwen3.8 27B?: Qwen3.8 27B leads SWE-bench at 58.8% vs 48.6%. SWE-bench is one harness, not your repo.
Which is cheaper to run in production?: DeepSeek V3 output tokens are $1.03/1M versus $3.2/1M. Input prices and retry rates still move the real bill.
Which is faster, DeepSeek V3 or Qwen3.8 27B?: Qwen3.8 27B has the lower time-to-first-token (140 ms vs 380 ms). Tokens/sec is a separate column if you care about long completions.
Which has the larger context window?: Qwen3.8 27B accepts 262k tokens versus 164k.
Can I self-host either model?: Both DeepSeek V3 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 V3 and Qwen3.8 27B Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons

All DeepSeek V3 matchups →|All Qwen3.8 27B matchups →

DeepSeek V3 vs DeepSeek Coder V2 (previous deepseek)DeepSeek V3 vs DeepSeek R1 (next deepseek)Qwen3.8 27B vs Qwen 3 Max (previous qwen)DeepSeek V4 Pro vs Qwen3.8 27B Qwen QwQ 32B vs Qwen3.8 27B DeepSeek V4 Flash vs Qwen3.8 27B

DeepSeek V3 vs Qwen3.8 27B benchmark

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Matchup Breakdown

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Category wins across intelligence, speed, and pricing efficiency.

DeepSeek V3 (2)vsQwen3.8 27B (8)

DeepSeek V3: 2W (20%)Overall: Qwen3.8 27BQwen3.8 27B: 8W (80%)

← DeepSeek V3Qwen3.8 27B →

Qwen3.8 27B (5/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

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

Preference Elo

1,310vs1,398

Coding Elo

—vs1,422

SWE-bench

48.6%vs58.8%

LiveBench

55.4%vs60.6%

GPQA Diamond

59.1%vs73.4%

DeepSeek V3: 0WQwen3.8 27B: 5W

Qwen3.8 27B (2/2)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Output speed

66 tok/svs152 tok/s

Time to first token

380 msvs140 ms

DeepSeek V3: 0WQwen3.8 27B: 2W

DeepSeek V3 (2/3)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Output price

$1.03/1Mvs$3.2/1M

Input price

$0.26/1Mvs$0.45/1M

Context window

164kvs262k

DeepSeek V3: 2WQwen3.8 27B: 1W

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsQwen3.8 27B

Higher SWE-bench (58.8%).

High-volume chatDeepSeek V3

Lower output list price ($1.03/1M).

Voice / low-latency UIQwen3.8 27B

Lower TTFT (140 ms).

Long-document RAGQwen3.8 27B

Larger window (262k).

Screenshots / visionQwen3.8 27B

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

Target Workload	Recommended Pick	Evaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agents	Qwen3.8 27B	Higher SWE-bench (58.8%).
High-volume chat	DeepSeek V3	Lower output list price ($1.03/1M).
Voice / low-latency UI	Qwen3.8 27B	Lower TTFT (140 ms).
Long-document RAG	Qwen3.8 27B	Larger window (262k).
Screenshots / vision	Qwen3.8 27B	Qwen3.8 27B is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, DeepSeek V3 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 V3 or Qwen3.8 27B?

Qwen3.8 27B leads SWE-bench at 58.8% vs 48.6%. SWE-bench is one harness, not your repo.

Which is cheaper to run in production?

DeepSeek V3 output tokens are $1.03/1M versus $3.2/1M. Input prices and retry rates still move the real bill.

Which is faster, DeepSeek V3 or Qwen3.8 27B?

Qwen3.8 27B has the lower time-to-first-token (140 ms vs 380 ms). Tokens/sec is a separate column if you care about long completions.

Which has the larger context window?

Qwen3.8 27B accepts 262k tokens versus 164k.

Can I self-host either model?

Both DeepSeek V3 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 V3 and Qwen3.8 27B Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Intelligence & Reasoning

Speed & Latency

Pricing & Capacity

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Qwen3.8 27B

Qwen3.8 27B

DeepSeek V3

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Key Selection Recommendations

Recommended Workload Routing

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

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

Cast Your Matchup Vote

Community Discussions (0)

Share card

CompareLLM Matrix

DeepSeek V3

Qwen3.8 27B

Frequently Asked Questions

Related news

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Intelligence & Reasoning

Speed & Latency

Pricing & Capacity

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Qwen3.8 27B

Qwen3.8 27B

DeepSeek V3

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Key Selection Recommendations

Recommended Workload Routing

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

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

Cast Your Matchup Vote

Community Discussions (0)

Share card

CompareLLM Matrix

DeepSeek V3

Qwen3.8 27B

Frequently Asked Questions

Related news

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons