Navigate
Advertise here

Qwen3.5-Flash vs Solar Pro 4 (low)

The average score is effectively tied at 6.7 vs 6.7. Qwen3.5-Flash has the lower benchmark cost at $0.089 vs $0.174. Qwen3.5-Flash is faster at 26.52s vs 145.21s, with pass rates of 37.7% vs 60.9%.

Last updated at: 2026-10-01

Compared models

Rank
#177
Total Output Tokens
219,122
Response Time (avg)
26.52s
Total Cost
$0.089
Rank
#178
Total Output Tokens
385,862
Response Time (avg)
145.21s
Total Cost
$0.174
Recommended model Qwen3.5-Flash

It has the best score here (6.7), while costing about 2.0x less than Solar Pro 4 (low).

Detailed comparison

Metric Qwen3.5-Flash Qwen3.5-Flash none Release: 2026-02-24 Solar Pro 4 Solar Pro 4 low Release: 2026-08-11
Score 6.7 6.7
Rank #177 #178
Reliability 10.0 10.0
Consistency 9.3 7.7
Attempts 69/69 69/69
Tests Correct
Attempt pass rate 37.7% 60.9%
Flaky tests 2 7
Total Runs 69 69
Cost per result 1.113 0.791
Total Cost $0.089 $0.174
Input Price $0.065 / 1M $0.090 / 1M
Output Price $0.260 / 1M $0.360 / 1M
Total Input Tokens 463,872 384,974
Output Tokens 219,122 13,946
Reasoning Tokens 0 371,916
Response Time (avg) 26.52s 145.21s
Response Time (max) 480.96s 640.89s
Response Time (total) 609.94s 3339.87s
Parameters ~35B total (~3B active) ~100B
Availability Closed Closed

Model generation showcase

Hamster playing table tennis

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

#177 Qwen3.5-Flash

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

#178 Solar Pro 4

low
No showcase result has been generated for this model yet.
Cost
N/A
Time
-
Tokens
0 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
Solar Pro 4 5.5 7.4 44.4% 1 259.63s 6,033 515 76,894

Quick Compare

Switch Comparison Pair