Roboflow

GPT-5.6 Sol vs Qwen3.8 27B

Compare GPT-5.6 Sol and Qwen3.8 27B side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in OCR, Image Captioning, Object Detection, Open Prompt, and Classification.

Compare GPT-5.6 Sol vs Qwen3.8 27B live

Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.

Detect and compare bounding boxes across models on the same image.

Open Object Detection in the full playground
OpenAIGPT-5.6 Sol
Run to compare this model.
QwenQwen3.8 27B
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

GPT-5.6 Sol vs Qwen3.8 27B on Vision Evals

GPT-5.6 Sol scores higher on 5 of the six Vision Evals tasks.

The widest gap is Counting, where GPT-5.6 Sol leads 74.3% to 64.9%.

Overall, GPT-5.6 Sol averages 79.0% (#16 of 61) against 74.7% (#22 of 61) for Qwen3.8 27B.

Qwen3.8 27B is cheaper ($0.0009 vs $0.0088 per sample), while GPT-5.6 Sol is faster (10.3s vs 18.0s per sample).

GPT-5.6 SolQwen3.8 27B

GPT-5.6 Sol vs Qwen3.8 27B Comparison Table

Evals updated September 29, 2026Pricing updated September 29, 2026

PropertyGPT-5.6 SolQwen3.8 27B
OrganizationOpenAIQwen
Categoryclosedopen
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateJul 2026Aug 2026
Context Window1.5M262K
Parameters27.78B
LicenseProprietaryApache 2.0
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$2.00$0.025
Output $/1M$10.00$4.35
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoDemo
Chart Question Answering
ClassificationDemoDemo
Document Question Answering
Image Tagging
Multi-Label Classification
Object DetectionDemoDemo
OCRDemoDemo
Vision Language
Visual Question AnsweringDemoDemo
Model Features
Foundation Vision
LLMs with Vision Capabilities
Multimodal Vision
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 6 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
79.0%
74.7%
Quantizationsself-hosted
BF1674.6%FP873.9%AWQ-INT474.7%hardware →
Avg cost / sample$0.0088$0.0009
Avg speed / sample10.32s17.99s
By task
Object Detection (low)
68.4%
±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 67.9 to 69.3
$0.015
65.7%
±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 64.6 to 66.5
$0
Object Detection (high)
68.4%
±0.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 67.7 to 69.3
$0.035
66.1%
±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 64.9 to 67.8
$0
Counting (low)
74.3%
±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 73.0 to 75.7
$0.0049
64.9%
±4.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 60.8 to 68.9
$0
Counting (high)
76.1%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 74.3 to 78.4
$0.0078
68.0%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 66.2 to 70.3
$0
Identification (low)
89.6%
±4.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.4 to 93.8
$0.0028
85.4%
±4.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.3 to 90.6
$0
Identification (high)
92.7%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.6 to 93.8
$0.0030
87.5%
±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.4 to 90.6
$0
OCR (low)
90.7%
±0.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.6 to 90.7
$0.011
92.2%
±1.2, Mean of 3 runs, range 91.1 to 93.4
$0
OCR (high)
90.2%
±0.2, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.0 to 90.4
$0.025
91.5%
±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.1 to 92.9
$0
Data Extraction (low)
84.9%
±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 83.5 to 85.6
$0.0033
78.0%
±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 77.3 to 79.4
$0
Data Extraction (high)
86.9%
±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 86.6 to 87.6
$0.0041
80.8%
±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 79.4 to 81.4
$0
Reasoning (low)
66.0%
±2.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 63.6 to 68.9
$0.0043
62.0%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 60.3 to 64.2
$0
Reasoning (high)
71.7%
±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 70.2 to 72.8
$0.0061
66.0%
±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 65.6 to 66.9
$0

GPT-5.6 Sol vs Qwen3.8 27B: Overview

GPT-5.6 Sol

GPT-5.6 Sol is the flagship model in OpenAI's GPT-5.6 family, which also includes Terra (a balanced everyday-work tier) and Luna (a fast, cost-efficient tier). Sol is designed for demanding reasoning, long-horizon agentic workflows, software engineering, computer use, scientific research, and cybersecurity tasks. It introduces two new capability modes: a "max" reasoning effort setting that allocates additional compute time for difficult problems, and an "ultra" mode that coordinates multiple subagents in parallel to accelerate complex, multi-step work. The model supports native multimodal input, allowing it to process screenshots, diagrams, charts, documents, and photographs alongside text. A reported context window of approximately 1.5 million tokens enables processing of large codebases, lengthy research documents, and extended agentic sessions.

GPT-5.6 Sol was announced on June 26, 2026, initially in a limited preview for trusted partners, and reached general availability on July 9, 2026. On the Agents' Last Exam benchmark, which evaluates long-running professional workflows across 55 fields, Sol scores 53.6. On Terminal-Bench 2.1, which tests command-line agentic coding workflows, Sol Ultra achieves 91.9%. The model also demonstrates gains in life sciences evaluations, including long-horizon genomics and quantitative biology analyses. OpenAI paired the release with its most extensive safety evaluation to date, combining human red teaming with large-scale automated testing, and classified Sol as High capability in both cybersecurity and biological risk under its Preparedness Framework, though it does not cross the Critical threshold in either category.

Qwen3.8 27B

Qwen3.8-27B is a dense vision-language model of roughly 27.78 billion parameters from Alibaba's Qwen team, built on the architectural foundation established by the Qwen3.5 generation. It takes interleaved text, image, and video input through an integrated vision encoder and produces text, covering document and chart understanding, visual question answering, front-end code generation from visual references, and agentic computer-use workflows. The decoder is a hybrid stack of 64 layers that repeats a pattern of three Gated DeltaNet linear-attention blocks, each followed by a feed-forward block, then one grouped-query full-attention block, so only a quarter of the layers maintain a conventional key-value cache. Native context length is 262,144 tokens.

Post-training targets long-horizon agentic work, and the model exposes per-request thinking control that lets callers switch reasoning traces on or off and choose a reasoning effort level. Multi-token prediction weights are trained alongside the main network for speculative decoding. Qwen reports improvements over Qwen3.6-27B on agentic and multimodal evaluations including Terminal-Bench 2.1, OSWorld-Verified, and SWE-bench Multimodal, with additional results on MathVision, CharXiv, and an internal Vision2Web suite.

Frequently Asked Questions

On Roboflow's Vision Evals, GPT-5.6 Sol performed better. It scores higher on 5 of the six vision tasks and averages 79.0% (#16 of 61) against 74.7% (#22 of 61) for Qwen3.8 27B. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.

Yes. On the Vision Evals Counting benchmark at low effort, GPT-5.6 Sol leads with 74.3% against 64.9%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.

Qwen3.8 27B is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0009 per sample against $0.0088. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.

GPT-5.6 Sol is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 10.3s per inference against 18.0s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.

Yes. The comparison demo on this page runs both models on the same image side by side for OCR and image captioning in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.