How do Qwen3.8 27B and LongCat 2.0 compare on coding benchmarks?

The comparison table shows SWE-bench, SWE-Pro, SWE-Atlas, Terminal-Bench, DeepSWE, and coding agent index scores for both Qwen3.8 27B and LongCat 2.0 when publicly disclosed.

LLM Comparison

Qwen3.8 27B vs LongCat 2.0: benchmark scores, pricing & comparison.

Q: Which is better: Qwen3.8 27B or LongCat 2.0?

AskClash compares Qwen3.8 27B and LongCat 2.0 side by side across SWE-bench, GPQA, HLE, Terminal-Bench, coding agent scores, token pricing, AskClash ACB, and context window so you can see which model wins on each benchmark.

Side-by-side Qwen3.8 27B vs LongCat 2.0 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.

Open live leaderboard Qwen3.8 27B model page LongCat 2.0 model page

Rank #17 vs #26AskClash overall scores 57.0 vs 47.1.

Pricing $0.45/$3.20 vs $0.75/$2.95Input and output token prices per 1M tokens when published.

Open Weight vs Open WeightAlibaba vs Meituan.

Qwen3.8 27B vs LongCat 2.0 benchmark comparison

Green cells highlight the winning model for each metric. Scores are cached from the AskClash LLM leaderboard snapshot.

Metric	Qwen3.8 27B	LongCat 2.0
Overall Score	57.0	47.1
Leaderboard Rank	#17	#26
ACB	56.4	—
HLE	30.8	—
GPQA	89.2	88.9
IFEval	79.5	90.0
SWE-Pro	61.7	59.5
Terminal-Bench	73.0	70.8
DeepSWE	42.2	—
OSWorld	84.3	—
CharXiv	90.2	—
Tau2	—	88.2
Input Price (per 1M tokens)	$0.45	$0.75
Output Price (per 1M tokens)	$3.20	$2.95
Context Window	262K	1M
Benchmarks Published	9	5

Qwen3.8 27B vs LongCat 2.0 head-to-head charts

Qwen3.8 27B leads 4 and LongCat 2.0 leads 1 of 5 shared benchmarks. Qwen3.8 27B is cheaper on a defined 1M-input / 200K-output workload. Charts show only benchmarks both models publish.

Qwen3.8 27BLongCat 2.0

Overall

57.0Qwen3.8 27B

47.1LongCat 2.0

GPQA

89.2Qwen3.8 27B

88.9LongCat 2.0

IFEval

79.5Qwen3.8 27B

90.0LongCat 2.0

SWE-Pro

61.7Qwen3.8 27B

59.5LongCat 2.0

Terminal-Bench

73.0Qwen3.8 27B

70.8LongCat 2.0

Qwen3.8 27B

Input$0.45

Output$3.20

Workload$1.09

Context262K

LongCat 2.0

Input$0.75

Output$2.95

Workload$1.34

Context1M

Workload = published cost of 1M input + 200K output tokens. Open the live leaderboard for interactive compare charts.

More Qwen3.8 27B and LongCat 2.0 comparisons

Explore how Qwen3.8 27B and LongCat 2.0 stack up against other top-ranked LLMs.

Claude Opus 5 vs Qwen3.8 27B Claude Opus 5 vs LongCat 2.0 Claude Fable 5 vs Qwen3.8 27B Claude Fable 5 vs LongCat 2.0 Grok 4.6 vs Qwen3.8 27B Grok 4.6 vs LongCat 2.0 GPT-5.6 Sol vs Qwen3.8 27B GPT-5.6 Sol vs LongCat 2.0 Kimi K3 vs Qwen3.8 27B Kimi K3 vs LongCat 2.0

How to read this comparison

Benchmark scores

Higher is better for all benchmark scores (SWE-bench, GPQA, HLE, Terminal-Bench, etc.). Green marks the model with the higher score.

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.