Navigate
AI BENCHY
Advertise here

Meituan: LongCat 2.0 vs Qwen: Qwen3.5-27B

Qwen3.5-27B leads on average score with 6.5 vs 6.3. LongCat 2.0 has the lower benchmark cost at $0.044 vs $0.090. Qwen3.5-27B is faster at 4.76s vs 5.18s, with pass rates of 36.4% vs 40.9%.

Recommended modelQwen3.5-27BIt has the strongest score in this comparison (6.5) and the best overall balance of cost and response time across all 2 models.

Last updated at: 2026-07-20

Metric LongCat 2.0 LongCat 2.0 none Release: 2026-07-20 Qwen3.5-27B Qwen3.5-27B none Release: 2026-02-24
Score 6.3 6.5
Rank #111 #103
Reliability 10.0 10.0
Consistency 9.3 9.3
Tests Correct
Attempt pass rate 36.4% 40.9%
Flaky tests 2 2
Total Runs 66 66
Cost per result 0.627 0.763
Total Cost $0.044 $0.090
Input Price $0.300 / 1M $0.260 / 1M
Output Price $1.200 / 1M $2.600 / 1M
Total Input Tokens 108,743 102,316
Output Tokens 9,372 24,321
Reasoning Tokens 0 0
Response Time (avg) 5.18s 4.76s
Response Time (max) 48.38s 69.46s
Response Time (total) 113.95s 104.71s

Hamster playing table tennis

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

#111 LongCat 2.0

none
Cost
$0.027
Time
411.7s
Tokens
22,283 tok

#103 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
LongCat 2.0 5.5 10.0 33.3% 0 2.85s 7,446 578 0
Qwen3.5-27B 5.8 10.0 33.3% 0 1.80s 7,913 415 0

Quick Compare

Switch Comparison Pair