Qwen3.8 27B vs Underdog Saluki 27B

Overall
48
vs
Overall
33

Qwen3.8 27B is clearly better. It wins 44 of the 67 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. Both models spend about the same on thinking per test case.

Thinking tokensAnswer tokens
TaskAB
Overall
4833.3s
5.9K, 91% thinking6.9K, 84% thinking
335m 15s
Agents
5736.6s
5.2K, 78% thinking11.8K, 97% thinking
409m 2s
Structured Extraction
7320.6s
4.6K, 92% thinking4.4K, 92% thinking
433m 17s
Coding
3753.0s
9.3K, 94% thinking9.2K, 49% thinking
166m 54s
Grounded Answers
6131.6s
4.2K, 91% thinking4.5K, 92% thinking
433m 22s
Instruction Following
6733.6s
6.9K, 93% thinking8K, 94% thinking
466m 5s
Business Logic
3632.9s
7.6K, 98% thinking5.2K, 81% thinking
333m 55s
Security & permissions
5122.6s
3.7K, 85% thinking4.9K, 91% thinking
433m 47s
Diagnosis & investigation
040.0s
5.9K, 85% thinking8.7K, 94% thinking
06m 39s

What you'd run

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

SpecAB
Speed
196 tok/s
23 tok/s
Machine
Hosted
Apple M5 Pro, 48 GB
Memory at 32K
—
10.2 GB
Context
256K
256K
Cost per run
$1.28
Not measured
Cost per case
$0.0083
Not measured
Time per case
33.3s (better)
5m 15s
Quantization
FP8
IQ2_XS
Harness
openrouter
llama.cpp

The race

1 lead change

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

Qwen3.8 27BUnderdog Saluki 27B
025507510050100150Perfect run4833

Every test case

153 test cases

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

44 won by Qwen3.8 27B23 won by Underdog Saluki 27B86 tied