Qwen3.8 Flash vs ReMM SLERP 13B
Qwen3.8 Flash costs 1.4x less per output token than ReMM SLERP 13B ($0.47 vs $0.65 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $0.47
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $0.65
Qwen3.8 Flash or ReMM SLERP 13B: which to pick
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Qwen3.8 Flash for output tokens 1.4x cheaper ($0.47 vs $0.65 per million) and a larger context window (1M against 6K tokens).
No benchmark has tested both yet. Qwen3.8 Flash has results on LiveBench coding, LiveBench research and LiveBench browser; ReMM SLERP 13B has none yet. 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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Long documents
Listed context window
Qwen3.8 Flash
Qwen3.8 Flash takes 1M tokens against 6K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen3.8 Flash
Qwen3.8 Flash $0.0004, ReMM SLERP 13B $0.0007 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Qwen3.8 Flash not benchmarked, ReMM SLERP 13B not benchmarked.
- 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
- Qwen3.8 Flash $0.47 against ReMM SLERP 13B $0.65 per million output tokens, 1.4x apart.
- Context window
- Qwen3.8 Flash takes 1M tokens, ReMM SLERP 13B 6K.
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 Index1 board measured
| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 Flash | ReMM SLERP 13B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench coding | 87.4% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 42 boards here | |||
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards measured
| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 Flash | ReMM SLERP 13B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench research | 74.6% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured |
| LiveBench browser | 48.0% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured |
| LiveBench long agentic | 37.1% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here | |||
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 Flash | ReMM SLERP 13B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench reasoning | 87.4% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 22 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 Flash | ReMM SLERP 13B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench design | 72.8% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here | |||
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 Flash | ReMM SLERP 13B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench data analysis | 74.2% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 47 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 Flash costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Qwen3.8 Flash costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Qwen3.8 Flash 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 | Qwen3.8 Flash | ReMM SLERP 13B |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Qwen | Undi95 |
| Weights | Open weights | Open weights |
| Released | August 26, 2026 | July 22, 2023 |
| Context window | 1M | 6K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.15 | $0.35 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.47 | $0.65 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 1 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Qwen3.8 Flash better than ReMM SLERP 13B for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Qwen3.8 Flash for output tokens 1.4x cheaper ($0.47 vs $0.65 per million) and a larger context window (1M against 6K tokens).
Which is cheaper, Qwen3.8 Flash or ReMM SLERP 13B?
Qwen3.8 Flash costs $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.47 per million output tokens; ReMM SLERP 13B costs $0.35 and $0.65. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Qwen3.8 Flash or ReMM SLERP 13B?
Qwen3.8 Flash, with 1M tokens against 6K.
Has any benchmark tested both Qwen3.8 Flash and ReMM SLERP 13B?
No benchmark has tested both yet. Qwen3.8 Flash has results on LiveBench coding, LiveBench research and LiveBench browser; ReMM SLERP 13B has none yet. Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 22, 2026.