Skip to content
ModelCap

Head-to-head comparison

Gemma 4 26B A4B vs Qwen3.8 27B

Gemma 4 26B A4B (Google) and Qwen3.8 27B (Qwen) compared on the ModelCap Index, API price, context window, provider availability, weight access and every public benchmark board they share. Figures are the same ones shown on the live rankings; nothing here is a hidden score.

Snapshot as of 9 September 2026

As of 9 September 2026, Qwen3.8 27B holds the stronger ModelCap Index position (#35 vs #36); Gemma 4 26B A4B is 8.8× cheaper per output token ($0.34/1M vs $3.00/1M); and Qwen3.8 27B offers the longer context window (1M vs 262K tokens).

Which should you choose?

Choose Gemma 4 26B A4B if…

  • API cost matters — $0.34/1M output tokens against $3.00/1M, about 8.8× cheaper.
  • your workload is prompt-heavy — input tokens cost $0.07/1M against $0.42/1M.

Choose Qwen3.8 27B if…

  • you want the stronger overall ModelCap Index position — #35 against #36 (65.2 vs 65.0 points).
  • you need the longer context window — 1M tokens against 262K.
  • you want provider choice — 13 listed API providers against 9.
  • Arena coding is your yardstick — 1494 against 1481.
  • AA Humanity's Last Exam is your yardstick — 33.9% against 11.5%.
  • you want the more recently listed model — Qwen3.8 27B was listed 14 August 2026, Gemma 4 26B A4B 3 April 2026.

Gemma 4 26B A4B vs Qwen3.8 27B: specs, pricing and context

Specification comparison of Gemma 4 26B A4B and Qwen3.8 27B
FieldGemma 4 26B A4BGoogleQwen3.8 27BQwen
ModelCap Index position#36#35
Index score65.065.2
EvidenceMeasuredMeasured
Input price / 1M tokens$0.07$0.42
Output price / 1M tokens$0.34$3.00
Context window262K tokens1M tokens
Max output tokens16K131K
API providers listed913
Weight accessOpen weightsOpen weights
Input modalitiesImage, Text, VideoText, Image, Video
First listed3 April 202614 August 2026
PublisherGoogleQwen

Evidence: 2 public benchmark observations across 2 boards · 4 public benchmark observations across 4 boards. Prices are the lowest listed API offer per million tokens observed on the OpenRouter catalogue.

Benchmark scores: Gemma 4 26B A4B vs Qwen3.8 27B

Public benchmark boards where Gemma 4 26B A4B or Qwen3.8 27B has a published result
BoardGemma 4 26B A4BQwen3.8 27BLeads
Arena codingArena (LMArena)14811466–149614941480–1507Qwen3.8 27B
AA Intelligence IndexArtificial Analysis—33.9intelligence-index:v4.3:xhighOnly one result
AA Terminal-Bench 2.1Artificial Analysis—79.8%terminal-bench:2.1:terminus-2:e2b:pass-at-1:3-repeats:source-model="Qwen3.8 27B (xhigh)":reasoning=trueOnly one result
AA τ²-Bench TelecomArtificial Analysis40.4%tau2:telecom:dual-control:pass-at-1:3-repeats:source-model="Gemma 4 26B A4B (Non-reasoning)":reasoning=false—Only one result
AA Humanity's Last ExamArtificial Analysis11.5%hle:may-2025:text-only-2158:no-tools:pass-at-1:source-model="Gemma 4 26B A4B (Non-reasoning)":reasoning=false33.9%hle:may-2025:text-only-2158:no-tools:pass-at-1:source-model="Qwen3.8 27B (xhigh)":reasoning=trueQwen3.8 27B
WildClawBench OpenClawWildClawBench—48.0Only one result

Scores are the sources' own published figures for each model's best evaluated configuration; ModelCap never re-runs a benchmark.

Want a different pairing? Open the interactive comparison tool to swap either model for any current ranked language model.

Gemma 4 26B A4B vs Qwen3.8 27B: common questions

Is Gemma 4 26B A4B better than Qwen3.8 27B?

Qwen3.8 27B ranks higher on the ModelCap Index as of 9 September 2026: #35 against #36. That is a capability ranking built from public benchmark evidence with published uncertainty; whether it is "better" for you also depends on price, context and where you can run it. Their published uncertainty intervals overlap, so the rank difference alone does not establish a reliable capability advantage for your workload.

Is Gemma 4 26B A4B cheaper than Qwen3.8 27B?

Gemma 4 26B A4B is cheaper on output tokens: $0.34/1M against $3.00/1M. Input tokens are $0.07/1M for Gemma 4 26B A4B and $0.42/1M for Qwen3.8 27B. Prices are the lowest listed API offer ModelCap observed, in USD per million tokens. For 1,000 requests with 2,000 input and 500 output tokens each (2M input + 0.5M output), the listed-rate estimate is $0.31 for Gemma 4 26B A4B versus $2.34 for Qwen3.8 27B. Gemma 4 26B A4B costs 86.8% less in this scenario. This excludes caching, batch discounts, prompt-length tiers, tool charges and retries; verify the selected endpoint before budgeting.

Which has the bigger context window, Gemma 4 26B A4B or Qwen3.8 27B?

Qwen3.8 27B has the larger context window: 1M tokens against 262K.

Which is better for coding, Gemma 4 26B A4B or Qwen3.8 27B?

Arena coding: Gemma 4 26B A4B 1481, Qwen3.8 27B 1494 — Qwen3.8 27B leads.

Are Gemma 4 26B A4B and Qwen3.8 27B open-weight models?

Gemma 4 26B A4B: Open weights. Qwen3.8 27B: Open weights. Open weights mean the checkpoint can be downloaded and self-hosted under its licence; API-only models are available solely through hosted endpoints.

Where can I run Gemma 4 26B A4B and Qwen3.8 27B?

ModelCap currently lists 9 API providers for Gemma 4 26B A4B and 13 for Qwen3.8 27B, from the OpenRouter catalogue snapshot the site serves; each model page lists the providers and their prices.

How current is this Gemma 4 26B A4B vs Qwen3.8 27B comparison?

Every figure comes from the sealed ModelCap dataset published 9 September 2026; the page re-renders within a minute of each data refresh, and the ModelCap Index positions are the same ones shown on the live rankings.

Explore further