Navigate
AI BENCHY
Advertise here

Ling 3.0 Flash vs Qwen: Qwen3.5-27B

Qwen3.5-27B leads on average score with 6.5 vs 6.4. Ling 3.0 Flash (high) has the lower benchmark cost at $0.000 vs $0.058. Qwen3.5-27B is faster at 4.76s vs 13.32s, with pass rates of 63.6% vs 40.9%.

Recommended modelQwen3.5-27BIt has the best score here (6.5), while responding about 2.8x faster than Ling 3.0 Flash (high).

Last updated at: 2026-07-24

Metric Ling 3.0 Flash Ling 3.0 Flash high Release: 2026-07-24 Free Available Qwen3.5-27B Qwen3.5-27B none Release: 2026-02-24
Score 6.4 6.5
Rank #114 #109
Reliability 9.4 10.0
Consistency 8.6 9.3
Tests Correct
Attempt pass rate 63.6% 40.9%
Flaky tests 4 2
Total Runs 66 66
Cost per result 0.000 0.763
Total Cost $0.000 $0.058
Input Price $0.000 / 1M $0.195 / 1M
Output Price $0.000 / 1M $1.560 / 1M
Total Input Tokens 132,224 102,316
Output Tokens 92,393 24,321
Reasoning Tokens 211,994 0
Response Time (avg) 13.32s 4.76s
Response Time (max) 75.27s 69.46s
Response Time (total) 292.99s 104.71s

Hamster playing table tennis

Prompt: Create a detailed SVG illustration of a hamster playing table tennis.

#114 Ling 3.0 Flash

high
Cost
$0.000
Time
30.7s
Tokens
10,576 tok

#109 Qwen3.5-27B

none
Cost
$0.007
Time
42.9s
Tokens
4,273 tok

Top Models by Score

Score vs Total Cost

Response Time (avg)

Score vs Response Time (avg)

Total Output Tokens

Score vs Total Output Tokens

Category Breakdown

Coding Score Consistency Attempt pass rate Flaky tests Tests Correct Response Time (avg) Input Tokens Output Tokens Reasoning Tokens
Ling 3.0 Flash 6.7 5.0 66.7% 2 14.85s 8,298 15,602 32,152
Qwen3.5-27B 5.8 10.0 33.3% 0 1.80s 7,913 415 0

Quick Compare

Switch Comparison Pair