Navigate
AI BENCHY
Advertise here

Qwen3.5-Flash vs Step 3.5 Flash (medium)

The average score is effectively tied at 6.0 vs 5.9. Qwen3.5-Flash has the lower benchmark cost at $0.073 vs $0.132. Qwen3.5-Flash is faster at 25.28s vs 191.63s, with pass rates of 34.9% vs 50.0%.

Last updated at: 2026-08-15

Rank
#185
Total Output Tokens
209,201
Response Time (avg)
25.28s
Total Cost
$0.073
Rank
#187
Total Output Tokens
568,536
Response Time (avg)
191.63s
Total Cost
$0.132
Recommended model Qwen3.5-Flash

It has the best score here (6.0), while costing about 1.8x less than Step 3.5 Flash (medium).

Detailed comparison

Metric Qwen3.5-Flash Qwen3.5-Flash none Release: 2026-02-24 Step 3.5 Flash Step 3.5 Flash medium Release: 2026-02-01
Score 6.0 5.9
Rank #185 #187
Reliability 10.0 10.0
Consistency 9.3 8.6
Attempts 66/66 63/66
Tests Correct
Attempt pass rate 34.9% 50.0%
Flaky tests 2 2
Total Runs 66 63
Cost per result 1.066 0.858
Total Cost $0.073 $0.132
Input Price $0.065 / 1M $0.100 / 1M
Output Price $0.260 / 1M $0.300 / 1M
Total Input Tokens 282,356 65,716
Output Tokens 209,201 189,424
Reasoning Tokens 0 379,112
Response Time (avg) 25.28s 191.63s
Response Time (max) 480.96s 1597.85s
Response Time (total) 556.14s 3066.07s
Parameters ~35B total (~3B active) 196B total (11B active)
Availability Closed Open source

Model generation showcase

Hamster playing table tennis

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

#185 Qwen3.5-Flash

none
Cost
$0.003
Time
47.4s
Tokens
7,799 tok

#187 Step 3.5 Flash

medium
Cost
$0.008
Time
277.1s
Tokens
23,695 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-Flash 5.5 10.0 33.3% 0 850ms 7,913 519 0
Step 3.5 Flash 2.4 5.2 0.0% 0 258.38s 2,211 13,207 22,429

Quick Compare

Switch Comparison Pair