Navigate
Advertise here

Qwen3.5-27B vs GLM 5 (medium)

Qwen3.5-27B leads on average score with 7.2 vs 7.2. Qwen3.5-27B has the lower benchmark cost at $0.116 vs $0.360. Qwen3.5-27B is faster at 9.98s vs 39.05s, with pass rates of 47.8% vs 76.8%.

Last updated at: 2026-10-01

Compared models

Rank
#139
Total Output Tokens
36,422
Response Time (avg)
9.98s
Total Cost
$0.116
Rank
#146
Total Output Tokens
138,257
Response Time (avg)
39.05s
Total Cost
$0.360
Recommended model Qwen3.5-27B

It has the best score here (7.2), while costing about 3.1x less than GLM 5 (medium).

Detailed comparison

Metric Qwen3.5-27B Qwen3.5-27B none Release: 2026-02-24 GLM 5 GLM 5 medium Release: 2026-02-12
Score 7.2 7.2
Rank #139 #146
Reliability 10.0 10.0
Consistency 9.4 7.9
Attempts 69/69 66/69
Tests Correct
Attempt pass rate 47.8% 76.8%
Flaky tests 2 5
Total Runs 69 66
Cost per result 1.153 2.552
Total Cost $0.116 $0.360
Input Price $0.195 / 1M $0.600 / 1M
Output Price $1.560 / 1M $1.920 / 1M
Total Input Tokens 283,977 212,440
Output Tokens 36,422 22,922
Reasoning Tokens 0 115,335
Response Time (avg) 9.98s 39.05s
Response Time (max) 124.53s 110.70s
Response Time (total) 229.52s 546.68s
Parameters 27B 744B total (40B active)
Availability Open source Open source

Model generation showcase

Hamster playing table tennis

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

#139 Qwen3.5-27B

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

#146 GLM 5

medium
Cost
$0.005
Time
20.7s
Tokens
2,068 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
Qwen3.5-27B 5.8 10.0 33.3% 0 1.80s 7,913 415 0
GLM 5 10.0 10.0 100.0% 0 74.30s 7,254 2,997 52,930

Quick Compare

Switch Comparison Pair