GPT-5.6 Sol Pro vs Qwen3.8 27B
Qwen3.8 27B costs 7.8x less per output token than GPT-5.6 Sol Pro ($2.55 vs $20.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 3 benchmarks have a result for both.
GPT-5.6 Sol Pro or Qwen3.8 27B: which to pick
Only Qwen3.8 27B has a coding score, 74.2 on the Vibe Coding Index; GPT-5.6 Sol Pro has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick GPT-5.6 Sol Pro for a larger context window (1.05M against 1M tokens) and work measured by APEX-Agents or DTBench, where it leads.
- Shared results
- 3
- GPT-5.6 Sol Pro only
- 4
- Qwen3.8 27B only
- 82
- Like-for-like categories
- 2 of 9
Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.
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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Only Qwen3.8 27B has a coding score, so no call is made.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
No call
Only Qwen3.8 27B has a AA Intelligence Index result, 33.7.
Directional only
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
No call
Only Qwen3.8 27B has a AA Agentic Index result, 45.8.
Directional only
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
No call
Only Qwen3.8 27B has a GPQA Diamond result, 88.9%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
No call
Only Qwen3.8 27B has a MMLU Pro result, 84.3%.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
GPT-5.6 Sol Pro
GPT-5.6 Sol Pro takes 1.05M tokens against 1M.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen3.8 27B
GPT-5.6 Sol Pro $0.014, Qwen3.8 27B $0.0017 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
No call
Only Qwen3.8 27B has the number, $1.26.
Directional only
At a glance
- Coding index
- GPT-5.6 Sol Pro not benchmarked, Qwen3.8 27B 74.2 from 4 benchmarks.
- Widest category
- General, 12.9 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- LMCA: GPT-5.6 Sol Pro 59.2% against Qwen3.8 27B 41.4%, 17.9 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- GPT-5.6 Sol Pro $20.00 against Qwen3.8 27B $2.55 per million output tokens, 7.8x apart.
- Context window
- GPT-5.6 Sol Pro takes 1.05M tokens, Qwen3.8 27B 1M.
Benchmark by benchmark
First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.
| Category | GPT-5.6 Sol Pro | Bars | Qwen3.8 27B | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic work | 1 | 0 | ||
| General | 2 | 0 | ||
| All shared boards | 3 | 0 |
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index19 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol Pro | Qwen3.8 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench coding | Not measured | 86.8% | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LMArena WebDev | Not measured | 1593 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| AA Coding Index | Not measured | 68.1 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 84.0% | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | Not measured | 86.0% | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 64.8% | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| Code migration (Vals AI) | Not measured | 14.2% | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| ProgramBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 0.0% | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| IOI (Vals AI) | Not measured | 39.1% | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI) | Not measured | 58.4% | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| SkillsBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 38.1% | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| CyberBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 67.8% | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| SciCode | Not measured | 46.6% | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| WeirdML | 89.4% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.6 Sol Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | Not measured | 1483 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | Not measured | 1478 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LMArena WebDev: React | Not measured | 1602 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | Not measured | 1570 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LMArena WebDev: from an image | Not measured | 1577 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 20 boards here | |||
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol Pro | Qwen3.8 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | Not measured | 33.7 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | Not measured | 151.7 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol Pro | Qwen3.8 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | Not measured | 45.8 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LiveBench research | Not measured | 59.4% | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LiveBench browser | Not measured | 32.0% | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LiveBench long agentic | Not measured | 27.9% | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| Finance Agent (Vals AI) | Not measured | 48.5% | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 30.9% | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| Legal Research Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 36.1% | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI) | Not measured | 59.7% | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI) | Not measured | 0.0% | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| APEX-Agents | 51.4% | 47.5% | GPT-5.6 Sol Pro |
| Neither model has a result on the other 31 boards here | |||
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index14 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol Pro | Qwen3.8 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | Not measured | 88.9% | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LiveBench reasoning | Not measured | 80.0% | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| MMMU Pro (Vals AI) | Not measured | 83.9% | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 90.5% | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 33.9% | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| ARC-AGI | Not measured | 87.5% | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| ARC-AGI-2 | Not measured | 42.4% | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| SimpleBench | 71.7% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.6 Sol Pro measured |
| Chess puzzles | 68.0% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.6 Sol Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | Not measured | 1459 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: expert | Not measured | 1479 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | Not measured | 1461 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LMArena Vision: diagrams | Not measured | 1285 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LMArena Vision: homework | Not measured | 1295 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol Pro | Qwen3.8 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath, tier 4 | 80.5% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.6 Sol Pro measured |
| ProofBench | Not measured | 16.0% | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: math | Not measured | 1455 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | Not measured | 1458 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index9 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol Pro | Qwen3.8 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | Not measured | 84.3% | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 82.4% | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | Not measured | 70.8% | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| MortgageTax (Vals AI) | Not measured | 64.9% | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| MedCode (Vals AI) | Not measured | 28.7% | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: science | Not measured | 1467 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | Not measured | 1437 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | Not measured | 1447 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | Not measured | 1438 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol Pro | Qwen3.8 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench design | Not measured | 75.9% | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol Pro | Qwen3.8 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench data analysis | Not measured | 76.6% | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| SAGE (Vals AI) | Not measured | 52.4% | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | Not measured | 83.8% | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | Not measured | 82.0% | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| DTBench | 96.0% | 88.0% | GPT-5.6 Sol Pro |
| LMCA | 59.2% | 41.4% | GPT-5.6 Sol Pro |
| Surface Evolver Bench | Not measured | 45.0% | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LMArena Text | Not measured | 1440 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | Not measured | 1436 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | Not measured | 1383 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LMArena Vision | Not measured | 1269 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: English | Not measured | 1448 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: non-English | Not measured | 1428 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | Not measured | 1501 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: German | Not measured | 1443 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | Not measured | 1387 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: Korean | Not measured | 1384 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: French | Not measured | 1465 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | Not measured | 1449 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | Not measured | 1415 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: Polish | Not measured | 1439 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | Not measured | 1440 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | Not measured | 1448 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | Not measured | 1405 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | Not measured | 1393 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LMArena Vision: English | Not measured | 1267 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LMArena Vision: Chinese | Not measured | 1326 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LMArena Vision: reading text | Not measured | 1281 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LMArena Vision: humor | Not measured | 1235 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| LMArena Vision: creative writing | Not measured | 1237 | Only Qwen3.8 27B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol Pro | Qwen3.8 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 5 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
Qwen3.8 27B costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Qwen3.8 27B costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Qwen3.8 27B 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.
| Specification | OpenAI GPT-5.6 Sol Pro | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | OpenAI | Qwen |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | July 9, 2026 | August 14, 2026 |
| Context window | 1.05M | 1M |
| Input $/Mtok | $4.00 | $0.425 |
| Output $/Mtok | $20.00 | $2.55 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | 74.2 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 4 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | $1.26 |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is GPT-5.6 Sol Pro better than Qwen3.8 27B for coding?
Only Qwen3.8 27B has a coding score, 74.2 on the Vibe Coding Index; GPT-5.6 Sol Pro has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GPT-5.6 Sol Pro for a larger context window (1.05M against 1M tokens) and work measured by APEX-Agents or DTBench, where it leads.
Which is cheaper, GPT-5.6 Sol Pro or Qwen3.8 27B?
GPT-5.6 Sol Pro costs $4.00 per million input tokens and $20.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3.8 27B costs $0.425 and $2.55. Cost per solved task is known for Qwen3.8 27B only.
Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5.6 Sol Pro or Qwen3.8 27B?
GPT-5.6 Sol Pro, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.
How many benchmarks is the GPT-5.6 Sol Pro vs Qwen3.8 27B comparison based on?
3 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GPT-5.6 Sol Pro's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen3.8 27B's on 4. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.