Navigate
AI BENCHY
AD
Track all your projects in one dashboard. Get 📊stats, 🔥heatmaps and 👀recordings in one self-hosted dashboard.
uxwizz.com

AI BENCHY Compare

Qwen: Qwen3.5-122B-A10B vs Qwen: Qwen3.5-27B

Summary

Qwen3.5-27B leads on average score with 5.9 vs 5.3. Qwen3.5-27B has the lower benchmark cost at $0.015 vs $0.020. Qwen3.5-27B is faster at 1.68s vs 3.41s, with pass rates of 31.8% vs 38.1%.

Recommended modelQwen3.5-27BIt has the best score here (5.9), while responding about 2.0x faster than Qwen3.5-122B-A10B.

Last updated at: 2026-07-14

Metric Qwen3.5-122B-A10B Qwen3.5-122B-A10B none Release: 2026-02-24 Qwen3.5-27B Qwen3.5-27B none Release: 2026-02-24
Score 5.3 5.9
Rank #152 #128
Reliability 10.0 10.0
Consistency 9.6 9.3
Tests Correct
Attempt pass rate 31.8% 38.1%
Flaky tests 1 2
Total Runs 63 63
Cost per result 0.393 0.249
Total Cost $0.020 $0.015
Input Price $0.260 / 1M $0.195 / 1M
Output Price $2.080 / 1M $1.560 / 1M
Total Input Tokens 47,735 44,478
Output Tokens 3,383 3,592
Reasoning Tokens 0 0
Response Time (avg) 3.41s 1.68s
Response Time (max) 46.00s 9.39s
Response Time (total) 71.59s 35.25s

Generation showcase

Hamster playing table tennis

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

#152 Qwen3.5-122B-A10B

none
Cost
$0.016
Time
44.5s
Tokens
6,431 tok

#128 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
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B 3.7 7.0 22.2% 1 2.77s 7,913 693 0
Qwen3.5-27B 5.8 10.0 33.3% 0 1.80s 7,913 415 0

Quick Compare

Switch Comparison Pair