Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-6.1 Sol vs Qwen3.8 27B

GPT-6.1 Sol leads Qwen3.8 27B on coding, 82.4 to 74.2 on the Vibe Coding Index, and Qwen3.8 27B costs 3.9x less per output token ($2.55 vs $10.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 65 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace GPT-6.1 Sol Replace Qwen3.8 27B
GPT-6.1 SolOpenAI
Coding
82.4
Overall
81.4
Output $/M
$10.00
55
Qwen3.8 27BQwen
Coding
74.2
Overall
59.6
Output $/M
$2.55
10
vs boards won of 65 shared

GPT-6.1 Sol or Qwen3.8 27B: which to pick

Pick GPT-6.1 Sol for coding: it scores 82.4 on the Vibe Coding Index against 74.2 for Qwen3.8 27B.

Pick Qwen3.8 27B for output tokens 3.9x cheaper ($2.55 vs $10.00 per million) and work measured by CyberBench (Vals AI) or LMArena Text: coding, where it leads.

Model AGPT-6.1 SolOpenAI82.4/1005 independent benchmarksNo cost per solved taskModel BQwen3.8 27BQwen74.2/1004 independent benchmarks$1.26 per solved task
Shared results
65
GPT-6.1 Sol only
33
Qwen3.8 27B only
20
Like-for-like categories
8 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.

At a glance

Coding index
GPT-6.1 Sol 82.4 from 5 benchmarks, Qwen3.8 27B 74.2 from 4 benchmarks.
Widest category
Math, 32.7 points apart on average over 3 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
ProofBench: GPT-6.1 Sol 99.0% against Qwen3.8 27B 16.0%, 83.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-6.1 Sol $10.00 against Qwen3.8 27B $2.55 per million output tokens, 3.9x apart.
Context window
GPT-6.1 Sol 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.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryGPT-6.1 SolBarsQwen3.8 27BTies
Coding103
Intelligence20
Agentic work81
Reasoning90
Math30
Knowledge32
Web design10
General194
All shared boards5510
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index103
Coding benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Sol and Qwen3.8 27B
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 SolQwen3.8 27BLeader
LiveBench coding96.0%86.8%GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena WebDev17531593GPT-6.1 Sol
AA Coding IndexNot measured68.1Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured84.0%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured86.0%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)55.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)88.9%64.8%GPT-6.1 Sol
Code migration (Vals AI)65.1%14.2%GPT-6.1 Sol
ProgramBench (Vals AI)3.0%0.0%GPT-6.1 Sol
IOI (Vals AI)96.9%39.1%GPT-6.1 Sol
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)Not measured58.4%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
SWE-bench Multimodal (Vals AI)43.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
SkillsBench (Vals AI)Not measured38.1%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
CyberBench (Vals AI)39.3%67.8%Qwen3.8 27B
SciCode55.8%46.6%GPT-6.1 Sol
FrontierCode50.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
ALE-Bench2743.8Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: coding14781483Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena Text: software and IT14761478Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena WebDev: React17541602GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena WebDev: HTML18001570GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena WebDev: from an image17021577GPT-6.1 Sol
SciCode9.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Sol and Qwen3.8 27B
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 SolQwen3.8 27BLeader
AA Intelligence Index51.833.7GPT-6.1 Sol
Epoch Capabilities Index168.4151.7GPT-6.1 Sol
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index81
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Sol and Qwen3.8 27B
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 SolQwen3.8 27BLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured45.8Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
Design Arena: agents building web apps1306Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1213Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Design Arena: spreadsheets1259Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LiveBench research83.5%59.4%GPT-6.1 Sol
LiveBench browser88.0%32.0%GPT-6.1 Sol
LiveBench long agentic73.0%27.9%GPT-6.1 Sol
SREBench (Vals AI)50.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)52.0%48.5%GPT-6.1 Sol
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)21.8%30.9%Qwen3.8 27B
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)38.5%36.1%GPT-6.1 Sol
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI)6.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)70.8%59.7%GPT-6.1 Sol
BioMysteryBench (Vals AI)79.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI)52.9%0.0%GPT-6.1 Sol
Vals Science Index59.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Robo-bench (Vals AI)28.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
APEX-Agents60.0%47.5%GPT-6.1 Sol
SpireClimb24.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Neither model has a result on the other 22 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index90
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Sol and Qwen3.8 27B
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 SolQwen3.8 27BLeader
GPQA DiamondNot measured88.9%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
LiveBench reasoning92.6%80.0%GPT-6.1 Sol
MysteryMechanism (Vals AI)46.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)Not measured83.9%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured90.5%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)52.9%33.9%GPT-6.1 Sol
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)95.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
ARC-AGI98.5%87.5%GPT-6.1 Sol
ARC-AGI-294.2%42.4%GPT-6.1 Sol
Chess puzzles68.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Mystery game puzzles80.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
EBR-bench54.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14631459GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Text: expert14891479GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14651461GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Vision: diagrams13061285GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Vision: homework13561295GPT-6.1 Sol
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
Math benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Sol and Qwen3.8 27B
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 SolQwen3.8 27BLeader
OTIS Mock AIME100.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 393.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
FrontierMath, tier 4100.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
ProofBench99.0%16.0%GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Text: math14891455GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Text: mathematical work15131458GPT-6.1 Sol
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index32
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Sol and Qwen3.8 27B
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 SolQwen3.8 27BLeader
MMLU ProNot measured84.3%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured82.4%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured70.8%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured64.9%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
MedCode (Vals AI)48.8%28.7%GPT-6.1 Sol
SimpleQA Verified73.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: science14441467Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14331437Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena Text: legal and government14711447GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Text: business and finance14451438GPT-6.1 Sol
FACTS Benchmark Suite75.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Web design benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Sol and Qwen3.8 27B
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 SolQwen3.8 27BLeader
Design Arena: websites1321Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Design Arena: UI components1317Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Design Arena: game dev1389Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Design Arena: data viz1281Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Design Arena: 3D1460Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Design Arena: all code categories1345Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LiveBench design82.1%75.9%GPT-6.1 Sol
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index194
General benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Sol and Qwen3.8 27B
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 SolQwen3.8 27BLeader
Vals Index63.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LiveBench data analysis82.7%76.6%GPT-6.1 Sol
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)59.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
SAGE (Vals AI)46.5%52.4%Qwen3.8 27B
MedScribe (Vals AI)86.5%83.8%GPT-6.1 Sol
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)84.0%82.0%GPT-6.1 Sol
DTBench96.5%88.0%GPT-6.1 Sol
LMCA62.8%41.4%GPT-6.1 Sol
Surface Evolver BenchNot measured45.0%Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
Furniture assembly80.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text14431440GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Text: instruction following14661436GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Text: creative writing14251383GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Vision12881269GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Text: English14501448GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Text: non-English14331428GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Text: Chinese14871501Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1443Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1387Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1384Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
LMArena Text: French14601465Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena Text: Spanish14391449Qwen3.8 27B
LMArena Text: Russian14571415GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1439Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn14421440GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Text: longer queries14581448GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Text: writing and language14441405GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14261393GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Vision: English12741267GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1326Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
LMArena Vision: reading text12891281GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1235Only Qwen3.8 27B measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing13011237GPT-6.1 Sol
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Sol and Qwen3.8 27B
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 SolQwen3.8 27BLeader
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

GPT-6.1 Sol$0.0070Fits in one request
Qwen3.8 27B$0.0017Fits in one request

Qwen3.8 27B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-6.1 Sol$0.130Fits in one request
Qwen3.8 27B$0.029Fits in one request

Qwen3.8 27B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-6.1 Sol$0.500Fits in one request
Qwen3.8 27B$0.111Fits in one request

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.

Specifications of GPT-6.1 Sol and Qwen3.8 27B
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-6.1 SolQwen3.8 27B
MakerOpenAIQwen
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedSeptember 29, 2026August 14, 2026
Context window1.05M1M
Input $/Mtok$2.00$0.425
Output $/Mtok$10.00$2.55
Coding index82.474.2
Independent measurements behind it54
Cost per solved taskNot computable$1.26
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-6.1 Sol better than Qwen3.8 27B for coding?

Pick GPT-6.1 Sol for coding: it scores 82.4 on the Vibe Coding Index against 74.2 for Qwen3.8 27B. Pick Qwen3.8 27B for output tokens 3.9x cheaper ($2.55 vs $10.00 per million) and work measured by CyberBench (Vals AI) or LMArena Text: coding, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, GPT-6.1 Sol or Qwen3.8 27B?

GPT-6.1 Sol costs $2.00 per million input tokens and $10.00 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-6.1 Sol or Qwen3.8 27B?

GPT-6.1 Sol, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-6.1 Sol vs Qwen3.8 27B comparison based on?

65 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GPT-6.1 Sol's coding index rests on 5 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.

Compare next

Embed this comparison on your site

Free under CC BY 4.0, while the source link stays visible. Preview the frame · Terms and other embeds

<iframe src="https://llmbenchmark.ai/embed/compare/gpt-6-1-sol-vs-qwen3-8-27b" title="GPT-6.1 Sol vs Qwen3.8 27B, LLMBenchmark.ai" width="100%" height="360" style="border:0;max-width:100%" loading="lazy"></iframe>
<p style="font:13px/1.4 sans-serif;margin:6px 0 0">Source: <a href="https://llmbenchmark.ai/compare/gpt-6-1-sol-vs-qwen3-8-27b">LLMBenchmark.ai, GPT-6.1 Sol vs Qwen3.8 27B</a></p>