Benchmark scores
Higher is better for all benchmark scores (SWE-bench, GPQA, HLE, Terminal-Bench, etc.). Green marks the model with the higher score.
LLM Comparison
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3.8 27B: benchmark scores, pricing & comparison.
Side-by-side DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3.8 27B comparison across SWE-bench, GPQA, HLE, Terminal-Bench, coding agent scores, token pricing, context window, and AskClash RWT. Green marks the winner on each benchmark.
Verdict: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash ranks higher (#64 vs #110) and wins 6 of 6 shared benchmarks; DeepSeek V4.1 Flash costs less ($0.15/$0.60 vs $0.45/$3.20 per 1M tokens).
Rank #64 vs #110AskClash overall scores 57.3 vs 48.5.
Pricing $0.15/$0.60 vs $0.45/$3.20Input and output token prices per 1M tokens when published.
API vs Open WeightDeepSeek vs Alibaba.
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3.8 27B benchmark comparison
Green cells highlight the winning model for each metric. Scores are cached from the AskClash LLM leaderboard snapshot.
| Metric | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 57.3 | 48.5 |
| Leaderboard Rank | #64 | #110 |
| ACB | 63.0 | 56.4 |
| HLE | 36.8 | 30.8 |
| GPQA | 90.9 | 89.2 |
| IFEval | — | 79.5 |
| SWE-Pro | — | 61.7 |
| Terminal-Bench | 26.8 | — |
| DeepSWE | 74.2 | 42.2 |
| GDPval-AA | 1600.0 | 1419.0 |
| OSWorld | — | 84.3 |
| Finance Agent | — | 48.6 |
| CharXiv | — | 90.2 |
| MMMU-Pro | 77.0 | 76.3 |
| Input Price (per 1M tokens) | $0.15 | $0.45 |
| Output Price (per 1M tokens) | $0.60 | $3.20 |
| Context Window | 1M | 262K |
| Benchmarks Published | 10 | 12 |
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3.8 27B head-to-head charts
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads 7 and Qwen3.8 27B leads 0 of 7 shared benchmarks. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is cheaper on a defined 1M-input / 200K-output workload. Charts show only benchmarks both models publish.
DeepSeek V4.1 FlashQwen3.8 27B
Overall
ACB
HLE
GPQA
DeepSWE
GDPval-AA
MMMU-Pro
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
Input$0.15
Output$0.60
Workload$0.27
Context1M
Qwen3.8 27B
Input$0.45
Output$3.20
Workload$1.09
Context262K
Workload = published cost of 1M input + 200K output tokens. Open the live leaderboard for interactive compare charts.
More DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and Qwen3.8 27B comparisons
Explore how DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and Qwen3.8 27B stack up against other top-ranked LLMs.
Kimi K3.1 Pro vs DeepSeek V4.1 FlashKimi K3.1 Pro vs Qwen3.8 27BClaude Opus 5.5 vs DeepSeek V4.1 FlashClaude Opus 5.5 vs Qwen3.8 27BClaude Fable 5.1 vs DeepSeek V4.1 FlashClaude Fable 5.1 vs Qwen3.8 27BClaude Sonnet 5.5 vs DeepSeek V4.1 FlashClaude Sonnet 5.5 vs Qwen3.8 27BClaude Opus 5 vs DeepSeek V4.1 FlashClaude Opus 5 vs Qwen3.8 27B
How to read this comparison
Token pricing
Lower is better for input and output prices. Green marks the cheaper model per 1M tokens.
Coverage matters
Models with fewer disclosed benchmark cells may have inflated percentile scores. Check the benchmark cell count for context.
This comparison page is generated from the AskClash LLM leaderboard cache. Open the live leaderboard for real-time scores and interactive filtering.