Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct vs Qwen3.5-27B

Qwen3.5-27B leads Llama 3.1 8B Instruct on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 22.9 to 6.9, and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct costs 19.5x less per output token ($0.08 vs $1.56 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 37 benchmarks have a result for both.

Llama 3.1 8B InstructMeta Llama
Coding
No data
Overall
17.9
Output $/M
$0.08
0
Qwen3.5-27BQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.56
37
vs boards won of 37 shared

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct or Qwen3.5-27B: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Llama 3.1 8B Instruct for output tokens 19.5x cheaper ($0.08 vs $1.56 per million) and work measured by Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) or WeirdML, where it leads.

Shared results
37
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct only
14
Qwen3.5-27B only
16
Like-for-like categories
7 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
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct not benchmarked, Qwen3.5-27B not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 77.5 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: Llama 3.1 8B Instruct 16.4% against Qwen3.5-27B 93.9%, 77.5 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct $0.08 against Qwen3.5-27B $1.56 per million output tokens, 19.5x apart.
Context window
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct takes 131K tokens, Qwen3.5-27B 262K.

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
CategoryLlama 3.1 8B InstructBarsQwen3.5-27BTies
Coding04
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
Reasoning05
Math02
Knowledge04
General020
All shared boards037
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index04
Coding benchmarks for Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Qwen3.5-27B
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 8B InstructQwen3.5-27BLeader
LMArena WebDevNot measured1358Only Qwen3.5-27B measured
AA Coding Index5.4Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)11.6%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)0.8%32.6%Qwen3.5-27B
WeirdML1.7%39.5%Qwen3.5-27B
ALE-BenchNot measured349.4Only Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Text: coding11951427Qwen3.5-27B
LMArena Text: software and IT11951431Qwen3.5-27B
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1346Only Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1386Only Qwen3.5-27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 29 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Qwen3.5-27B
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 8B InstructQwen3.5-27BLeader
AA Intelligence Index6.922.9Qwen3.5-27B
Epoch Capabilities Index116.5Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Qwen3.5-27B
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 8B InstructQwen3.5-27BLeader
τ²-Bench Telecom16.4%93.9%Qwen3.5-27B
BALROG15.1%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Vending-Bench 2Not measured$202Only Qwen3.5-27B measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)25.8%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index05
Reasoning benchmarks for Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Qwen3.5-27B
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 8B InstructQwen3.5-27BLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)25.9%85.8%Qwen3.5-27B
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)5.3%23.9%Qwen3.5-27B
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)27.0%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts11751415Qwen3.5-27B
LMArena Text: expert11441427Qwen3.5-27B
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English11961429Qwen3.5-27B
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1249Only Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1256Only Qwen3.5-27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Math benchmarks for Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Qwen3.5-27B
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 8B InstructQwen3.5-27BLeader
AA Math Index4.3Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)4.3%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
OTIS Mock AIME1.7%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
MATH level 522.9%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
GSM8K82.4%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: math11791429Qwen3.5-27B
LMArena Text: mathematical work11801429Qwen3.5-27B
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Knowledge benchmarks for Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Qwen3.5-27B
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 8B InstructQwen3.5-27BLeader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)47.6%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
MMLU56.1%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: science11931437Qwen3.5-27B
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare11821425Qwen3.5-27B
LMArena Text: legal and government12061405Qwen3.5-27B
LMArena Text: business and finance11661399Qwen3.5-27B
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Qwen3.5-27B
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 8B InstructQwen3.5-27BLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index020
General benchmarks for Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Qwen3.5-27B
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 8B InstructQwen3.5-27BLeader
IFBench28.6%75.6%Qwen3.5-27B
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)18.0%77.7%Qwen3.5-27B
DTBench50.9%82.4%Qwen3.5-27B
LMCA5.4%34.0%Qwen3.5-27B
PIQA81.2%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text11871409Qwen3.5-27B
LMArena Text: instruction following11591393Qwen3.5-27B
LMArena Text: creative writing11541362Qwen3.5-27B
LMArena VisionNot measured1241Only Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Text: English12181425Qwen3.5-27B
LMArena Text: non-English11481390Qwen3.5-27B
LMArena Text: Chinese11511478Qwen3.5-27B
LMArena Text: German11441392Qwen3.5-27B
LMArena Text: Japanese10611346Qwen3.5-27B
LMArena Text: Korean10531359Qwen3.5-27B
LMArena Text: French11781410Qwen3.5-27B
LMArena Text: Spanish11691407Qwen3.5-27B
LMArena Text: Russian11581390Qwen3.5-27B
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1375Only Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn11721410Qwen3.5-27B
LMArena Text: longer queries11811413Qwen3.5-27B
LMArena Text: writing and language11621380Qwen3.5-27B
LMArena Text: entertainment and media11451363Qwen3.5-27B
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1246Only Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1301Only Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1246Only Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1227Only Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Vision: captioningNot measured1170Only Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing thingsNot measured1210Only Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1224Only Qwen3.5-27B 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
Image generation benchmarks for Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Qwen3.5-27B
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 8B InstructQwen3.5-27BLeader
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

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct$0.0001Fits in one request
Qwen3.5-27B$0.0010Fits in one request

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct$0.0027Fits in one request
Qwen3.5-27B$0.014Fits in one request

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct$0.011Exceeds the context window
Qwen3.5-27B$0.055Fits in one request

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct 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 Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Qwen3.5-27B
SpecificationMeta Llama 3.1 8B InstructQwen3.5-27B
MakerMeta LlamaQwen
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedJuly 23, 2024February 25, 2026
Context window131K262K
Input $/Mtok$0.05$0.195
Output $/Mtok$0.08$1.56
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it01
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Llama 3.1 8B Instruct better than Qwen3.5-27B for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Llama 3.1 8B Instruct for output tokens 19.5x cheaper ($0.08 vs $1.56 per million) and work measured by Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) or WeirdML, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Llama 3.1 8B Instruct or Qwen3.5-27B?

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct costs $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.08 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5-27B costs $0.195 and $1.56. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Llama 3.1 8B Instruct or Qwen3.5-27B?

Qwen3.5-27B, with 262K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the Llama 3.1 8B Instruct vs Qwen3.5-27B comparison based on?

37 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Llama 3.1 8B Instruct's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen3.5-27B's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next