Navigate
AI BENCHY
Advertise here

Qwen: Qwen3.5-35B-A3B vs Qwen: Qwen3.5-Flash

Qwen3.5-Flash (medium) leads on average score with 6.2 vs 6.2. Qwen3.5-Flash (medium) has the lower benchmark cost at $0.139 vs $0.837. Qwen3.5-Flash (medium) is faster at 84.82s vs 112.47s, with pass rates of 66.7% vs 69.7%.

Recommended modelQwen3.5-Flash (medium)It has the best score here (6.2), while costing about 6.0x less than Qwen3.5-35B-A3B (medium).

Last updated at: 2026-07-25

Metric Qwen3.5-35B-A3B Qwen3.5-35B-A3B medium Release: 2026-02-24 Qwen3.5-Flash Qwen3.5-Flash medium Release: 2026-02-24
Score 6.2 6.2
Rank #130 #125
Reliability 10.0 10.0
Consistency 7.6 7.8
Tests Correct
Attempt pass rate 66.7% 69.7%
Flaky tests 6 6
Total Runs 66 66
Cost per result 9.130 1.361
Total Cost $0.837 $0.139
Input Price $0.140 / 1M $0.065 / 1M
Output Price $1.000 / 1M $0.260 / 1M
Total Input Tokens 130,388 118,499
Output Tokens 40,630 12,284
Reasoning Tokens 786,040 490,610
Response Time (avg) 112.47s 84.82s
Response Time (max) 950.25s 515.38s
Response Time (total) 2474.28s 1781.22s

Hamster playing table tennis

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

#130 Qwen3.5-35B-A3B

medium
Cost
$0.009
Time
71.4s
Tokens
8,631 tok

#125 Qwen3.5-Flash

medium
Cost
$0.002
Time
25.8s
Tokens
4,294 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
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B 5.9 9.3 33.3% 0 206.65s 4,106 23,844 111,462
Qwen3.5-Flash 3.7 7.2 22.2% 1 58.87s 6,685 302 90,081

Quick Compare

Switch Comparison Pair