DeepSeek-V4-Flash vs Qwen3.8 27B
Wins 1 of 7 areas
Reasoning
Wins 3 of 7 areas
Coding · Long documents · Following instructions
Qwen3.8 27B wins more areas, narrowly.DeepSeek-V4-Flash is cheaper and better at reasoning.
Scores updated · 35 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the seven areas where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- CodingWriting and fixing software14Qwen3.8 27B4 of 8 tests · 3 ties
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked01Qwen3.8 27B1 of 2 tests · 1 tie
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts01Qwen3.8 27B1 of 1 test
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking41DeepSeek-V4-Flash4 of 6 tests · 1 tie
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own11Even1 each · 1 tie
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up11Even1 each
- MathCompetition and research-level math00Even0 each · 1 tie
Math and long documents rest on a single test each.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
DeepSeek-V4-Flash costs 88% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The three tests each model wins by the widest margin. Scores are out of 100.
Where Qwen3.8 27B pulls ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+61.4points ahead
- Fixes real GitHub issues, working as an agentLiveBench · Agentic Coding+14.6points ahead
- Common-sense trick questionsSimpleBench+13.9points ahead
Where DeepSeek-V4-Flash pulls ahead
- Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+24.8points ahead
- Abstract visual puzzles that people can solveARC-AGI-2+19points ahead
- Research-level physics problemsCritPt+11.2points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 35 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingQwen3.8 27B
- LMArena · WebDevQwen3.8 27B by 160 rating points14301590+160 rating
- LiveBench · Agentic CodingQwen3.8 27B by 14.646.861.4+14.6
- SWE-bench ProQwen3.8 27B by 9.152.661.7+9.1
- SciCodeDeepSeek-V4-Flash by 3.750.346.6+3.7
- Terminal-Bench 2.1Qwen3.8 27B by 1.178.779.8+1.1
- LiveBench · Codingtie7575.7tie
- SWE-bench Multilingualtie73.373.8tie
- LiveCodeBench v6tie90.690.3tie
AgentsEven
- τ-Bench V3 · BankingQwen3.8 27B by 8.639.448+8.6
- Terminal-Bench 4.0DeepSeek-V4-Flash by 6.512.15.6+6.5
- GDPValtie46.746tie
ReasoningDeepSeek-V4-Flash
- ARC-AGI-2DeepSeek-V4-Flash by 1961.442.4+19
- SimpleBenchQwen3.8 27B by 13.946.360.2+13.9
- CritPtDeepSeek-V4-Flash by 11.216.65.4+11.2
- LiveBench · ReasoningDeepSeek-V4-Flash by 6.686.680+6.6
- Humanity's Last ExamDeepSeek-V4-Flash by 4.738.633.9+4.7
- GPQA Diamondtie90.890.5tie
FactsEven
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationQwen3.8 27B by 61.48.369.7+61.4
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyDeepSeek-V4-Flash by 24.840.415.6+24.8
Following instructionsQwen3.8 27B
- LiveBench · Instruction FollowingQwen3.8 27B by 7.265.572.7+7.2
- IFBenchtie79.279.5tie
Other results12 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- Agents' Last ExamQwen3.8 27B by 17.725.242.9+17.7
- DeepSWE 1.1DeepSeek-V4-Flash by 12.254.442.2+12.2
- NL2RepoDeepSeek-V4-Flash by 11.954.242.3+11.9
- JobBenchDeepSeek-V4-Flash by 7.941.333.4+7.9
- AA Agentic IndexQwen3.8 27B by 4.841.746.5+4.8
- livebench_languageDeepSeek-V4-Flash by 4.879.274.3+4.8
- AA-OmniscienceQwen3.8 27B by 4.3-14.3-10+4.3
- Toolathlon VerifiedDeepSeek-V4-Flash by 3.270.367.1+3.2
- livebench_data_analysisDeepSeek-V4-Flash by 2.779.376.6+2.7
- ARC-AGI-1DeepSeek-V4-Flash by 1.58987.5+1.5
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexDeepSeek-V4-Flash by 169.168.1+1
- AA Intelligencetie34.333.7tie
Questions people ask
Which is better, DeepSeek-V4-Flash or Qwen3.8 27B?
Qwen3.8 27B wins three of the seven areas where both have results: coding, long documents and following instructions. DeepSeek-V4-Flash wins reasoning, and costs 88% less. They are level on agents, facts and math.
Which is better for coding?
Qwen3.8 27B. It wins 4 of the 8 coding tests both models report; DeepSeek-V4-Flash wins 1, and 3 are ties.
Which is cheaper?
DeepSeek-V4-Flash costs $0.14 per million input tokens and $0.28 per million output tokens; Qwen3.8 27B costs $0.50 and $3.00. That makes DeepSeek-V4-Flash about 88% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 35 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 23 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 12 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.