Model comparison

DeepSeek V3.1 vs Qwen 3.8 27B

DeepSeek against Qwen, compared on context, price, and verified benchmark results.

Catalog record checked September 26, 2026Individual provider fields may changeEvidence confidence: High — see receipts below

DeepSeek

DeepSeek V3.1

Budget · Open weights

Qwen

Qwen 3.8 27B

Budget · Open weights

AI model capability comparison
Specification	DeepSeek V3.1	Qwen 3.8 27B
Provider
Provider	DeepSeek	Qwen
Tier
Tier	Budget	Budget
Context window
Context window	128K	Winner: 262K
Max output
Max output	Not verifiedUnverified	Not verifiedUnverified
Input / 1M tokens
Input / 1M tokens	Winner: $0.25	$0.50
Output / 1M tokens
Output / 1M tokens	Winner: $0.95	$3
Weights
Weights	Open	Open
Parameters
Parameters	671B total / 37B active (MoE)	27B dense VLM (Gated DeltaNet hybrid)
Reasoning levels
Reasoning levels	low, high, max	low, medium, xhigh
Modalities
Modalities	text	text, image, video
License
License	MIT	Apache 2.0
API model id
API model id	Not publishedUnverified	qwen3.8-27b
Released
Released	August 21, 2025	August 13, 2026
Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index (2026-09-26)
Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index (2026-09-26)	13.5	Not verifiedUnverified
Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index [xhigh] (2026-09-26)
Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index [xhigh] (2026-09-26)	Not verifiedUnverified	33.7

Prices are USD per million tokens at standard rates, excluding batch and caching discounts. Bold indicates the better figure where one is objectively better. Values we could not confirm from the provider are shown as “Not verified” rather than estimated.

Benchmark receipts

Where each score comes from, and how far it can be compared across models.

2026-09-26
Artificial Analysis
Composite index blending reasoning, knowledge, and coding evals into one 0–100 score.
Comparable with caveatOnly same-version scores are comparable. v4.3.2 was rebaselined (the top score fell from 66 on v4.1.1 to ~58), so v4.1.1 figures must not be compared with v4.3.2 figures — check measuredAt.

Pricing tiers

DeepSeek V3.1: No first-party API: DeepSeek moved the deepseek-chat alias to V3.1-Terminus on 2025-09-22 (the alias itself was retired on 2026-07-24). Third-party hosts listed ~$0.25/$0.95 per MTok (secondary, last checked 2026-08-29) — verify with your host.

Qwen 3.8 27B: Hosted qwen3.8-27b lists $0.50/$3.00 per MTok on Alibaba Cloud Model Studio (API launched 2026-08-19). Open weights (Apache 2.0) for self-hosting.

BudgetOpen weightsRecord checked September 26, 2026

DeepSeek V3.1

DeepSeek V3.1 is a legacy open-weight (MIT) 671B/37B MoE with a 128K context — superseded by V3.1-Terminus, V3.2 and then V4.

Best for

Cost-sensitive hosted agents
High-volume coding assist
Open-weight deployments

Watch out

Legacy: DeepSeek's own API stopped serving V3.1 when deepseek-chat moved to V3.1-Terminus on 2025-09-22; hosted rates differ by provider and self-hosting needs datacentre VRAM.

BudgetOpen weightsRecord checked September 26, 2026

Qwen 3.8 27B

Qwen 3.8 27B is Alibaba's compact deployment-friendly dense VLM — 262K native context (1M via YaRN), Apache 2.0 weights, distinct from the hosted Qwen 3.8 Max API.

Best for

Self-hosting on a single node
Multimodal input at small scale
Long-context on modest hardware

Watch out

Dense 27B means higher memory per token than an MoE of equal active size; video input is multimodal-input only.

When the cheaper one wins

DeepSeek V3.1 is cheaper on output at $0.95 per million tokens against $3 for Qwen 3.8 27B — about 3.2×. Use the cheaper tier for classification, extraction, summarisation, and any task where the expensive model’s extra score does not change the accepted output. The expensive one only pays if your hardest task actually fails on the cheap tier. These are standard-tier API rates, excluding batch and cache discounts.

Run the model picker

Evidence confidence: High

How strong and complete the evidence behind this comparison is — not a prediction of which model is better.

Pricing verified on both sides — Input and output rates are verified for both models.
4/5 core specs verified on both sides — Not published for at least one side: max output.
1 shared named benchmark with differing scores — Measured on: Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index.
Verified within the last 90 days — Newest catalog check was 2 days ago.
Both models carry source citations — Each side has at least two catalog sources on record.

Source receipts

Each catalog figure was checked against the provider or an independent second source on the date shown.

DeepSeek V3.1: DeepSeek — V3.1 (accessed 2026-08-29)
DeepSeek V3.1: CloudPrice — DeepSeek V3.1 (accessed 2026-08-29)
DeepSeek V3.1: DeepSeek API changelog (2025-09-22: deepseek-chat upgraded to V3.1-Terminus) (accessed 2026-09-26)
Qwen 3.8 27B: HuggingFace — Qwen3.8-27B model card (accessed 2026-08-29)
Qwen 3.8 27B: LiveBench Leaderboard (Qwen 3.8 27B row) (accessed 2026-08-29)
Qwen 3.8 27B: Alibaba Cloud Model Studio pricing (qwen3.8-27b $0.50/$3.00) (accessed 2026-09-26)

Related comparisons

Diving deeper on one model? DeepSeek V3.1 · Qwen 3.8 27B

Common questions

DeepSeek V3.1 vs Qwen 3.8 27B

Answered from the verified figures on this page rather than general guidance.

Is DeepSeek V3.1 or Qwen 3.8 27B cheaper for input?

DeepSeek V3.1 is cheaper at $0.25 per million input tokens, against $0.50 for Qwen 3.8 27B — roughly 2.0× the price. Output tokens usually dominate a real bill, so weigh the output rate more heavily than the input rate. These are base rates; DeepSeek V3.1 has tiered pricing: No first-party API: DeepSeek moved the deepseek-chat alias to V3.1-Terminus on 2025-09-22 (the alias itself was retired on 2026-07-24). Third-party hosts listed ~$0.25/$0.95 per MTok (secondary, last checked 2026-08-29) — verify with your host. Qwen 3.8 27B has tiered pricing: Hosted qwen3.8-27b lists $0.50/$3.00 per MTok on Alibaba Cloud Model Studio (API launched 2026-08-19). Open weights (Apache 2.0) for self-hosting.

Is DeepSeek V3.1 or Qwen 3.8 27B cheaper for output?

DeepSeek V3.1 is cheaper at $0.95 per million output tokens, against $3 for Qwen 3.8 27B — roughly 3.2× the price. Output tokens usually dominate a real bill, so weigh the output rate more heavily than the input rate. These are base rates; DeepSeek V3.1 has tiered pricing: No first-party API: DeepSeek moved the deepseek-chat alias to V3.1-Terminus on 2025-09-22 (the alias itself was retired on 2026-07-24). Third-party hosts listed ~$0.25/$0.95 per MTok (secondary, last checked 2026-08-29) — verify with your host. Qwen 3.8 27B has tiered pricing: Hosted qwen3.8-27b lists $0.50/$3.00 per MTok on Alibaba Cloud Model Studio (API launched 2026-08-19). Open weights (Apache 2.0) for self-hosting.

Which has the larger context window, DeepSeek V3.1 or Qwen 3.8 27B?

Qwen 3.8 27B accepts 262K tokens against 128K for DeepSeek V3.1. This only matters if you routinely send very long documents or large codebases.

Do DeepSeek V3.1 and Qwen 3.8 27B support the same reasoning levels?

DeepSeek V3.1 exposes low, high, max, while Qwen 3.8 27B exposes low, medium, xhigh.

Should I use DeepSeek V3.1 or Qwen 3.8 27B?

Both sit in the budget tier, so the choice usually comes down to price and context rather than capability. DeepSeek V3.1 suits cost-sensitive hosted agents; Qwen 3.8 27B suits self-hosting on a single node.

Next step

Choosing between them

The verified figures that separate this pair, computed from the catalog rather than restated boilerplate.

Input price: DeepSeek V3.1 costs $0.25 per 1M tokens versus $0.50 for Qwen 3.8 27B — a 2x difference at the headline tier.
Context: Qwen 3.8 27B takes 262K against 128K for DeepSeek V3.1 — only decisive if your prompts approach the smaller window.

Run the model picker Estimate stack cost All model comparisons

Choosing a harness rather than a model — Cursor, Copilot, Claude Code, Windsurf, or Lovable? Compare agentic harnesses · Latest releases.