Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Codestral 2508 vs Qwen3.6 27B

Codestral 2508 costs 3.0x less per output token than Qwen3.6 27B ($0.90 vs $2.70 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.

Codestral 2508Mistral AI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.90
Qwen3.6 27BQwen
Coding
36.8
Overall
45.3
Output $/M
$2.70
vs $0.90 vs $2.70 per 1M output tokens. Codestral 2508 is 3.0x cheaper.

Codestral 2508 or Qwen3.6 27B: which to pick

Only Qwen3.6 27B has a coding score, 36.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; Codestral 2508 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Codestral 2508 for output tokens 3.0x cheaper ($0.90 vs $2.70 per million).

No benchmark has tested both yet. Codestral 2508 has results on ALE-Bench, Kagi LLM Benchmark and Design Arena: websites; Qwen3.6 27B on AA Coding Index, SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) and Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI). Compare them on price and context instead.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
Codestral 2508 not benchmarked, Qwen3.6 27B 36.8 from 2 benchmarks.
Widest category
None yet: no category has been tested on both models.
Widest single gap
None yet: no benchmark has tested both models.
Output price
Codestral 2508 $0.90 against Qwen3.6 27B $2.70 per million output tokens, 3.0x apart.
Context window
Codestral 2508 takes 256K tokens, Qwen3.6 27B 262K.

Benchmark by benchmark

Every board either model has a result on, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale. Only one model is measured on each, so no row names a leader.

CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index6 boards measured
Coding benchmarks for Codestral 2508 and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkCodestral 2508Qwen3.6 27BLeader
AA Coding IndexNot measured53.7Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured70.0%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured11.9%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
SciCodeNot measured42.8%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured34.8%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
ALE-Bench137.8Not measuredOnly Codestral 2508 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 33 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
Intelligence benchmarks for Codestral 2508 and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkCodestral 2508Qwen3.6 27BLeader
AA Intelligence IndexNot measured21.4Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured146.2Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
Agentic work benchmarks for Codestral 2508 and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkCodestral 2508Qwen3.6 27BLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured18.5Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured94.2%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards measured
Reasoning benchmarks for Codestral 2508 and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkCodestral 2508Qwen3.6 27BLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured84.2%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured23.1%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured85.9%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured7.0%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark32.5%Not measuredOnly Codestral 2508 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
Math benchmarks for Codestral 2508 and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkCodestral 2508Qwen3.6 27BLeader
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured91.1%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3Not measured35.1%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards measured
Knowledge benchmarks for Codestral 2508 and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkCodestral 2508Qwen3.6 27BLeader
CaseLaw (Vals AI)Not measured53.2%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured62.3%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured71.3%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured68.3%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards measured
Web design benchmarks for Codestral 2508 and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkCodestral 2508Qwen3.6 27BLeader
Design Arena: websites1013Not measuredOnly Codestral 2508 measured
Design Arena: UI components1017Not measuredOnly Codestral 2508 measured
Design Arena: game dev968Not measuredOnly Codestral 2508 measured
Design Arena: data viz1017Not measuredOnly Codestral 2508 measured
Design Arena: 3D1020Not measuredOnly Codestral 2508 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1007Not measuredOnly Codestral 2508 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards measured
General benchmarks for Codestral 2508 and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkCodestral 2508Qwen3.6 27BLeader
SAGE (Vals AI)Not measured45.6%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
IFBenchNot measured67.6%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured77.3%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
DTBenchNot measured78.1%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
LMCANot measured34.5%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 41 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

Codestral 2508$0.0008Fits in one request
Qwen3.6 27B$0.0018Fits in one request

Codestral 2508 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Codestral 2508$0.018Fits in one request
Qwen3.6 27B$0.031Fits in one request

Codestral 2508 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Codestral 2508$0.069Fits in one request
Qwen3.6 27B$0.117Fits in one request

Codestral 2508 costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of Codestral 2508 and Qwen3.6 27B
SpecificationMistral Codestral 2508Qwen3.6 27B
MakerMistral AIQwen
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedAugust 1, 2025April 27, 2026
Context window256K262K
Input $/Mtok$0.30$0.45
Output $/Mtok$0.90$2.70
Coding indexNot benchmarked36.8
Independent measurements behind it02
Cost per solved taskNot computable$1.30
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Codestral 2508 better than Qwen3.6 27B for coding?

Only Qwen3.6 27B has a coding score, 36.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; Codestral 2508 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Codestral 2508 for output tokens 3.0x cheaper ($0.90 vs $2.70 per million).

Which is cheaper, Codestral 2508 or Qwen3.6 27B?

Codestral 2508 costs $0.30 per million input tokens and $0.90 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 27B costs $0.45 and $2.70. Cost per solved task is known for Qwen3.6 27B only.

Which has the bigger context window, Codestral 2508 or Qwen3.6 27B?

Qwen3.6 27B, with 262K tokens against 256K.

Has any benchmark tested both Codestral 2508 and Qwen3.6 27B?

No benchmark has tested both yet. Codestral 2508 has results on ALE-Bench, Kagi LLM Benchmark and Design Arena: websites; Qwen3.6 27B on AA Coding Index, SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) and Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI). Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 21, 2026.

Compare next