Skip to content
ModelCap

Head-to-head comparison

Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct vs Qwen3.8 27B

Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct (Qwen) 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 1 October 2026

As of 1 October 2026, Qwen3.8 27B holds the stronger ModelCap Index position (#39 vs #210); Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct is 3× cheaper per output token ($1.00/1M vs $3.00/1M); and Qwen3.8 27B offers the longer context window (1M vs 33K tokens).

Which should you choose?

Choose Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct if…

  • API cost matters — $1.00/1M output tokens against $3.00/1M, about 3× cheaper.

Choose Qwen3.8 27B if…

  • you want the stronger overall ModelCap Index position — #39 against #210 (68.9 vs 23.6 points).
  • your workload is prompt-heavy — input tokens cost $0.42/1M against $0.66/1M.
  • you need the longer context window — 1M tokens against 33K.
  • you want provider choice — 17 listed API providers against 1.
  • Arena text is your yardstick — 1439 against 1271.
  • Arena coding is your yardstick — 1505 against 1342.
  • AA Humanity's Last Exam is your yardstick — 33.9% against 3.5%.
  • you want the more recently listed model — Qwen3.8 27B was listed 14 August 2026, Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct 11 November 2024.

Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct vs Qwen3.8 27B: specs, pricing and context

Specification comparison of Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct and Qwen3.8 27B
FieldQwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructQwenQwen3.8 27BQwen
ModelCap Index position#210#39
Index score23.668.9
EvidenceMeasuredMeasured
Input price / 1M tokens$0.66$0.42
Output price / 1M tokens$1.00$3.00
Context window33K tokens1M tokens
Max output tokens29K131K
API providers listed117
Weight accessOpen weightsOpen weights
Input modalitiesTextText, Image, Video
First listed11 November 202414 August 2026
PublisherQwenQwen

Evidence: 2 public benchmark observations across 2 boards · 5 public benchmark observations across 5 boards. Prices are the lowest listed API offer per million tokens observed on the OpenRouter catalogue.

Benchmark scores: Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct vs Qwen3.8 27B

Public benchmark boards where Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct or Qwen3.8 27B has a published result
BoardQwen2.5 Coder 32B InstructQwen3.8 27BLeads
Arena textArena (LMArena)12711262–1279Not reported14391433–1444Not reportedQwen3.8 27B
Arena codingArena (LMArena)13421324–136115051496–1514Qwen3.8 27B
ARC-AGI-2ARC Prize Foundation—42.4%X-HighOnly one result
SWE-benchSWE-bench (Princeton / SWE-agent team)9.0%—Only one result
AA Intelligence IndexArtificial Analysis—33.7X-HighOnly one result
AA Terminal-Bench 2.1Artificial Analysis—79.8%X-HighOnly one result
AA Humanity's Last ExamArtificial Analysis3.5%Non-reasoning33.9%X-HighQwen3.8 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.

Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct vs Qwen3.8 27B: common questions

Is Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct better than Qwen3.8 27B?

Qwen3.8 27B ranks higher on the ModelCap Index as of 1 October 2026: #39 against #210. 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 do not overlap, but the aggregate Index does not predict performance on every task; compare the relevant benchmark configurations before choosing.

Is Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct cheaper than Qwen3.8 27B?

Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct is cheaper on output tokens: $1.00/1M against $3.00/1M. Input tokens are $0.66/1M for Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct 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 $1.82 for Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct versus $2.34 for Qwen3.8 27B. Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct costs 22.2% 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, Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct or Qwen3.8 27B?

Qwen3.8 27B has the larger context window: 1M tokens against 33K.

Which is better for coding, Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct or Qwen3.8 27B?

Arena coding: Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct 1342, Qwen3.8 27B 1505 — Qwen3.8 27B leads.

Are Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct and Qwen3.8 27B open-weight models?

Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct: 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 Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct and Qwen3.8 27B?

ModelCap currently lists 1 API provider for Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct and 17 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 Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct vs Qwen3.8 27B comparison?

Every figure and ModelCap Index position comes from the same published snapshot dated 1 October 2026. Publication and page updates happen separately; use the snapshot date shown on the page.

Explore further