Navigate
AI BENCHY
Advertise here

AI BENCHY Compare

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

Summary

Qwen3.5-35B-A3B (medium) leads on average score with 6.3 vs 6.1. Qwen3.5-Flash has the lower benchmark cost at $0.005 vs $0.401. Qwen3.5-Flash is faster at 3.58s vs 72.57s, with pass rates of 69.8% vs 39.7%.

Recommended modelQwen3.5-FlashIts score stays close to the best score here (6.1 vs 6.3), while costing about 96.9x less than Qwen3.5-35B-A3B (medium).

Last updated at: 2026-07-14

Metric Qwen3.5-35B-A3B Qwen3.5-35B-A3B medium Release: 2026-02-24 Qwen3.5-Flash Qwen3.5-Flash none Release: 2026-02-24
Score 6.3 6.1
Rank #108 #119
Reliability 10.0 10.0
Consistency 7.5 9.7
Tests Correct
Attempt pass rate 69.8% 39.7%
Flaky tests 6 1
Total Runs 63 63
Cost per result 5.162 0.075
Total Cost $0.401 $0.005
Input Price $0.140 / 1M $0.065 / 1M
Output Price $1.000 / 1M $0.260 / 1M
Total Input Tokens 42,196 46,439
Output Tokens 40,630 4,276
Reasoning Tokens 353,577 0
Response Time (avg) 72.57s 3.58s
Response Time (max) 409.98s 27.18s
Response Time (total) 1524.04s 75.28s

Generation showcase

Hamster playing table tennis

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

#108 Qwen3.5-35B-A3B

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

#119 Qwen3.5-Flash

none
Cost
$0.003
Time
47.4s
Tokens
7,799 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 5.5 10.0 33.3% 0 850ms 7,913 519 0

Quick Compare

Switch Comparison Pair