Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Qwen3.8 27B

Overall
70
vs
Overall
48

Claude Haiku 5.5 is clearly better. It wins 64 of the 73 test cases where they differ.

Learn to build evals like this in the AI Engineering Academy

Task by task

A score turns orange only when that model wins clearly more of the task's test cases. Under each score, the average time per test case on the machine it ran on. Qwen3.8 27B spends 1.8× as many thinking tokens per test case.

Thinking tokensAnswer tokens
TaskAB
Overall
7025.5s
3.9K, 78% thinking5.9K, 91% thinking
4833.3s
Agents
6139.5s
3.7K, 61% thinking5.2K, 78% thinking
5736.6s
Structured Extraction
9013.5s
2.6K, 83% thinking4.6K, 92% thinking
7320.6s
Coding
8630.6s
6.8K, 76% thinking9.3K, 94% thinking
3753.0s
Grounded Answers
7613.9s
2.2K, 78% thinking4.2K, 91% thinking
6131.6s
Instruction Following
9431.5s
4.3K, 82% thinking6.9K, 93% thinking
6733.6s
Business Logic
6726.0s
5.5K, 95% thinking7.6K, 98% thinking
3632.9s
Security & permissions
6723.4s
2.7K, 70% thinking3.7K, 85% thinking
5122.6s
Diagnosis & investigation
1725.5s
2.3K, 50% thinking5.9K, 85% thinking
040.0s

What you'd run

The build behind each score. Orange marks the faster, smaller, cheaper or longer-context side.

SpecAB
Speed
225 tok/s (better)
196 tok/s
Machine
Hosted
Hosted
Memory at 32K
—
—
Context
1M (better)
256K
Cost per run
$0.42 (better)
$1.28
Cost per case
$0.0028 (better)
$0.0083
Time per case
25.5s (better)
33.3s
Quantization
—
FP8
Harness
openrouter
openrouter

The race

2 lead changes

Each model's running score as the test cases go by. The dashed line is a perfect run.

Claude Haiku 5.5Qwen3.8 27B
025507510050100150Perfect run7048

Every test case

153 test cases

Each square is one test case, colored by the model that scored higher.

64 won by Claude Haiku 5.59 won by Qwen3.8 27B80 tied