Part of Best Cheap LLM for High Volume
Cheapest Capable LLM
Qwen3.8 27B ranks first for Cheapest Capable LLM as of October 20, 2026.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7] It scores 72.66% on LiveBench Instruction Following (#15 of 59), including paraphrasing, simplifying, story generation, and summarization. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is the next-ranked alternative. It scores 70.03% on LiveBench Instruction Following (#25 of 59) and ranks #26 on LMArena (Elo 1475).
About this recommendation
- Updated
- Evidence through
- Sources
- 15
- Revision
- v107
Decision audit
Why this result
Inspect the inputs and the computed order behind the recommendation.
Models screened
24
live candidates
Evaluation feeds
4
task-weighted
Winner coverage
67%
intended feed weight
Largest provider share
2 of 8
deepseek
The leading model changed. Qwen: Qwen3.8 27B leads the measured task comparison with 2 independent evaluation families. Community volume, release age and usage popularity add no ranking points. This category also weights its stated price or context criteria.
Real-world track record is still developing. The recommendation can lead on independent measurements while practitioner reports accumulate.
Sources evaluated
These are the weights used in scoring. Missing measurements are omitted from each model’s average. A feed with no result for any model released in the last 60 days is stale and does not score until it catches up.
| Evaluation feed | Weight | Winner result | Field measured |
|---|---|---|---|
| price weight | 67% | 83/100 | 24/24 |
| Route reliabilitydisabled; last successful check unknownunavailable | 0% | feed unavailable | 0/24 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following (2026-06-25)Observed 2026-10-18 · evaluation date not supplied · qwen3.8-27bfailing; last successful check 2026-10-18 | 25% | #15 | 24/24 |
| LMArena TextObserved 2026-10-15 · evaluation date not supplied · qwen3.8-27b | 8% | #64 | 24/24 |
Provider concentration
Each exact model is scored separately; provider identity is not a ranking input.
- deepseek2 models
- Google2 models
- Moonshot AI1 model
- OpenAI1 model
- Qwen1 model
- Z.ai1 model
Decision table
Every published model is shown in computed order. Practitioner sources are distinct community threads, not the citations repeated in the prose below.
Qwen · coverage 67%
#15 LiveBench Instruction Following · #64 LMArena Text
deepseek · coverage 67%
#25 LiveBench Instruction Following · #26 LMArena Text
Z.ai · coverage 67%
#21 LMArena Text · #27 LiveBench Instruction Following
Google · coverage 67%
#1 LiveBench Instruction Following · #8 LMArena Text
Moonshot AI · coverage 67%
#14 LMArena Text · #20 LiveBench Instruction Following
Google · coverage 67%
#2 LiveBench Instruction Following · #13 LMArena Text
deepseek · coverage 67%
#44 LiveBench Instruction Following · #67 LMArena Text
OpenAI · coverage 67%
#31 LiveBench Instruction Following · #94 LMArena Text
Task score averages the available, task-weighted measurements. Benchmark positions compare models matched to our catalog. Models measured by at least two independent evaluator families are considered first. Missing tests, practitioner report counts, popularity and release age add no points. Coverage describes evidence breadth, not a probability of correctness. Scores within two points are shown as close under this policy; this is not a statistical confidence interval. When the leading scores are that close, the model measured by more evaluator families ranks first.
- 01
Qwen3.8 27BQwen · $0.040 in / $1.35 out per M tokens · 1M context · open-weight
Qwen3.8 27B scores 72.66% on LiveBench Instruction Following (#15 of 59), including paraphrasing, simplifying, story generation, and summarization.
Best when: Its strongest result for this task is on LiveBench Instruction Following, which measures following detailed instructions exactly.No practitioner reports are linked yet, so no cautions are listed. Absence of reports is not evidence of reliability.
- 02
DeepSeek V4.1 Flashdeepseek · $0.056 in / $0.12 out per M tokens · 1.0M context · open-weight
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash scores 70.03% on LiveBench Instruction Following (#25 of 59) and ranks #26 on LMArena (Elo 1475).
Best when: Use for human-preference-aligned outputs where LMArena ranking matters, placing #26 of 152 with Elo 1475.Watch out for
- Advertised as FREE in model selector but billed credits anyway, causing negative balance (-0.26 USD) and breaking web_search with HTTP 402 insufficient_credits.
- 03
GLM 5.3Z.ai · $0.079 in / $1.40 out per M tokens · 1.0M context · open-weight
GLM 5.3 scores 69.3% on LiveBench Instruction Following (#27 of 59) and ranks #21 on LMArena (Elo 1479), with DeepInfra offering the cheapest confirmed pricing at $0.56/M input and $2.50/M output, though the model was deliberately left unpriced on some public rate cards.
Best when: Select DeepInfra as your provider for the cheapest confirmed pricing at $0.56 per million input tokens and $2.50 per million output tokens, with monthly cost of $106 for 100M input + 20M output tokens versus $342 at the most expensive provider.No practitioner reports are linked yet, so no cautions are listed. Absence of reports is not evidence of reliability.
- 04
Gemini 3.8 FlashGoogle · $0.83 in / $4.13 out per M tokens · 1.0M context
Gemini 3.8 Flash scores 81.41% on LiveBench Instruction Following (#1 of 59), including paraphrasing, simplifying, story generation, and summarization.
Best when: Its strongest result for this task is on LiveBench Instruction Following, which measures following detailed instructions exactly.No practitioner reports are linked yet, so no cautions are listed. Absence of reports is not evidence of reliability.
- 05
Kimi K3Moonshot AI · $0.24 in / $11.94 out per M tokens · 1.0M context · open-weight
Kimi K3 scores 71.36% on LiveBench Instruction Following (#20 of 59) and ranks #14 on LMArena (Elo 1487), placing it mid-pack on both benchmarks with no cost-specific evidence.
Best when: Use for balanced performance with #14 LMArena ranking (Elo 1487) and 71.36% LiveBench Instruction Following.No practitioner reports are linked yet, so no cautions are listed. Absence of reports is not evidence of reliability.
- 06
Gemini 3.7 FlashGoogle · $0.75 in / $3.75 out per M tokens · 1.0M context
Gemini 3.7 Flash scores 79.93% on LiveBench Instruction Following (#2 of 59) and ranks #13 on LMArena (Elo 1488).
Best when: Use for near-top instruction-following performance at 79.93%, ranking #2 of 59 on LiveBench.Watch out for
- Listed with $0 cost for input and output in some model catalogs, causing session usage under-reporting and budgeting errors.
- 07
DeepSeek V4 Flash 0423deepseek · $0.091 in / $0.18 out per M tokens · 1.0M context · open-weight
DeepSeek V4 Flash 0423 scores 63.14% on LiveBench Instruction Following (#44 of 59), including paraphrasing, simplifying, story generation, and summarization.
Best when: Its strongest result for this task is on LiveBench Instruction Following, which measures following detailed instructions exactly.No practitioner reports are linked yet, so no cautions are listed. Absence of reports is not evidence of reliability.
- 08
GPT-5.4 NanoOpenAI · $0.20 in / $1.25 out per M tokens · 400K context
GPT-5.4 Nano scores 67.2% on LiveBench Instruction Following (#31 of 59), including paraphrasing, simplifying, story generation, and summarization.
Best when: Its strongest result for this task is on LiveBench Instruction Following, which measures following detailed instructions exactly.No practitioner reports are linked yet, so no cautions are listed. Absence of reports is not evidence of reliability.
Frequently asked
- What is the best model for Cheapest Capable LLM?
- Qwen3.8 27B ranks first as of October 20, 2026. Qwen3.8 27B scores 72.66% on LiveBench Instruction Following (#15 of 59), including paraphrasing, simplifying, story generation, and summarization.[1]
- What is the best alternative to Qwen3.8 27B?
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash ranks second. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash scores 70.03% on LiveBench Instruction Following (#25 of 59) and ranks #26 on LMArena (Elo 1475).[2][3][4][5][6][7]
- Can I self-host the top pick for Cheapest Capable LLM?
- Yes. Qwen3.8 27B is open-weight, so it can run on your own hardware as well as through hosted routes.[1]
Sources
- 1
“Within the 59 catalog models matched to this evaluation: Scores 72.66% on LiveBench Instruction Following (#15 of 59), including paraphrasing, simplifying, story generation, and summarization.”
LiveBench Instruction Following · Benchmark · Oct 18, 2026 - 2
“Within the 59 catalog models matched to this evaluation: Scores 70.03% on LiveBench Instruction Following (#25 of 59), including paraphrasing, simplifying, story generation, and summarization.”
LiveBench Instruction Following · Benchmark · Oct 18, 2026 - 3
“Within the 152 catalog models matched to this evaluation: Ranks #26 of 152 on LMArena's overall text arena (Elo 1475), based on blind human preference votes.”
LMArena text arena · Benchmark · Oct 15, 2026 - 4
[Bug] 上游钉住不生效却报成功：DeepSeek 4.1 按官方路由顺序执行，不采纳 only
Original-language excerpt:“结果 上游钉住（provider.only / providerOptions.gateway.only）不生效，但插件报成功。 以 cline-pass/deepseek-v4.1-flash 为例，原因是网关按官方路由顺序执行、不采纳 only：该模型的官方顺序里 deepseek 排在第一位，所以请求永远由 deepseek 服务，钉别的渠道都会被回退。 网关自己的原话（响应里的 planningReasoning）： 对比 glm-5.3，它才是真的被限制住了： 也就是说：同样是 only，在 glm-5.3 上是限制，在 deepseek-v4.1-flash 上不起作用——后者由官方路由顺序决定。 实测钉 baseten： 插件只判断"请求是否成功"，从不回读实际服务的渠道，于是把这种失效报成了成功。同一条 cline_pass_validate 还把 15 条渠道全部标为 available，配置的 14 条 exclude 也没挡住 deepseek。 插件侧的问题 1. **…”
codeOct · GitHub · Sep 20, 2026 - 5
“Description deepseek-v4.1-flash via OpenCode Go returns HTTP 402 insufficient_user_quota from an OrcaRouter upstream, while the OpenCode Go account quota is healthy and other Go models work with the same API key/session. This is the same September wave reported in #37231 (see the 2026-09-19 comment from @hyuri) and #49416. Steps to reproduce 1. Call OpenCode Go Chat Completions with deepseek-v4.1-flash: Response: HTTP 402 2. Check OpenCode Go usage with the same key: Result: HTTP…”
zfei2080 · GitHub · Sep 19, 2026 - 6
“Live probes from the Claude VPS session, 2026-09-19 ~14:00 IST, echo 'reply with exactly OK' | pi --print --provider X --model Y: | seat | result | |---|---| | litellm worker-capable | two pi packets ended their turn after 15-69 tool calls with no deliverable (units 0509-d1-drill-weekly, -r2); both alias deployments show litellm_deployment_state 2 | | synthetic hf:zai-org/GLM-5.3-Flash | 429 subscription exceeded | | zenmux deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash | 402 no credits | | cline z-ai/glm-5.3-…”
nish3451 · GitHub · Sep 19, 2026 - 7
“Separate ask: credit refund / account adjustment Beyond the technical fixes above, I'd like this reviewed as a billing matter, not only a bug: 1. My Cline Credits balance is negative (-0.26 USD) in the Cline provider, which silently breaks web_search with HTTP 402 insufficient_credits. 2. Part of that consumption happened while I was using models shown as FREE in the model selector (cline-free/muse-spark-1.3-contributor, cline-free/deepseek-v4.1-flash). 3. In the same pe…”
romemozu · GitHub · Sep 18, 2026 - 8
“Prices per provider from OpenRouter's list, 23 Sep. Monthly cost assumes 100M input + 20M output tokens. | Provider | $/M input | $/M output | Monthly | |---|---|---|---| | DeepInfra | 0.56 | 2.50 | $106 | | Novita | 0.78 | 2.46 | $127 | | Reka | 0.76 | 2.57 | $127 | | Io Net | 0.81 | 2.73 | $135 | | Phala | 0.84 | 2.64 | $137 | Same model, same usage: $106 at the cheapest provider, $342 at the most expensive. Live prices, precision and uptime for all 31, with a calculator for your own usag…”
yash-711 · Hugging Face · Sep 23, 2026 - 9
“Within the 59 catalog models matched to this evaluation: Scores 81.41% on LiveBench Instruction Following (#1 of 59), including paraphrasing, simplifying, story generation, and summarization.”
LiveBench Instruction Following · Benchmark · Oct 18, 2026 - 10
“Within the 59 catalog models matched to this evaluation: Scores 71.36% on LiveBench Instruction Following (#20 of 59), including paraphrasing, simplifying, story generation, and summarization.”
LiveBench Instruction Following · Benchmark · Oct 18, 2026 - 11
“Within the 152 catalog models matched to this evaluation: Ranks #14 of 152 on LMArena's overall text arena (Elo 1487), based on blind human preference votes.”
LMArena text arena · Benchmark · Oct 15, 2026 - 12
“Within the 59 catalog models matched to this evaluation: Scores 79.93% on LiveBench Instruction Following (#2 of 59), including paraphrasing, simplifying, story generation, and summarization.”
LiveBench Instruction Following · Benchmark · Oct 18, 2026 - 13
“What omp models on 17.3.0 lists google/gemini-3.7-flash with cost.input/output = 0 and reasoning: false / thinking: null. google/gemini-3.6-flash is curated ($1.50 / $7.50, thinking ladder). Session usage therefore under-reports 3.7 Flash spend, and :medium / :high suffixes are not in the catalog even though the API accepts thinkingLevel. Official rates (Gemini API, introductory through 2026-12-31) From [the 3.7 Flash announcement](https://blog.google/innovation-and-…”
john-aigora · GitHub · Aug 15, 2026 - 14
“Within the 59 catalog models matched to this evaluation: Scores 63.14% on LiveBench Instruction Following (#44 of 59), including paraphrasing, simplifying, story generation, and summarization.”
LiveBench Instruction Following · Benchmark · Oct 18, 2026 - 15
“Within the 59 catalog models matched to this evaluation: Scores 67.2% on LiveBench Instruction Following (#31 of 59), including paraphrasing, simplifying, story generation, and summarization.”
LiveBench Instruction Following · Benchmark · Oct 18, 2026
Rankings synthesized from community evidence and open benchmarks. See methodology. Not driven by vendor marketing.