#11 Qwen3.5-27B
medium- Cost
- $0.008
- Time
- 62.0s
- Tokens
- 3,099 tok
Qwen
Release: 2026-02-24
Tested on: 2026-04-11 01:44
qwen/qwen3.5-27b::medium
27BDenseOpen source
(medium)
(none)
Summary
Qwen3.5-27B scores 8.4 on AI BENCHY and ranks #11. It has N/A reliability, a 81.5% pass rate, $0.497 total cost, and 53.03s average response time.
What makes Qwen3.5-27B unique: It uses unusually many reasoning tokens, which can help explain its slower or more expensive runs.
Model facts
Researched on 2026-08-12
- Parameters
- 27B
- Architecture
- Dense
- Availability
- Open source
- License
- Apache-2.0
8.4
Consistency
8.8
N/A
$0.497
Total Output Tokens
245,000
Total Input Tokens
0
Input Price
$0.195 / 1M
Output Price
$1.560 / 1M
Cache Read Price
N/A
Cache Write Price
N/A
Cache prices apply to input tokens. Reads reuse cached prompts; writes store them and can cost extra. Output tokens use the output price.
Flaky tests
3
Flaky tests had mixed outcomes across runs (at least one pass and one fail).
Hamster playing table tennis
Prompt: Create a detailed SVG illustration of a hamster playing table tennis.
Run history
| Tested on | Score | Reliability | Tests Correct | Total Cost | Compare |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-08-14 01:58 Re-test | 7.5 | 10.0 | $0.982 ↓ | Compare | |
| 2026-07-16 22:51 New test added | 7.4 | 10.0 | $0.981 ↓ | Compare | |
| 2026-06-04 13:40 New test added | 7.8 | 10.0 | $0.536 ↓ | Compare | |
| 2026-05-22 00:04 Suite changed | 7.9 | 10.0 | $0.607 | Compare | |
| 2026-04-11 01:44 First recorded run | 8.4 | N/A | $0.497 | Current run |
Run comparison
| Run | Benchmark coverage | Score | Consistency | Reliability | Tests Correct | Flaky tests | Total Output Tokens | Total Input Tokens | Total Cost | Response Time (avg) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-11 01:44 · First recorded run | 54/54 attempts | 8.4 | 8.8 | N/A | 13/18 | 3 | 245,000 | 0 | $0.497 | 53.03s |
| 2026-08-14 01:58 · Re-test | 66/66 attempts | 7.5 | 7.8 | 10.0 | 13/22 | 6 | 614,909 | 111,644 | $0.982 | 113.28s |
| Difference | — | +1.0 | +1.0 | 0 | -3 | -369909 | -111644 | -$0.485 | -60259ms |
Benchmark coverage differs: 54/54 attempts (Target: 3 repeats per test) versus 66/66 attempts (Target: 3 repeats per test). Totals and repeat-sensitive metrics are not directly comparable.
These two runs used different benchmark suites, so the deltas reflect both model changes and suite changes.
Charts
Choose the first model, then click a second model to open a side-by-side page.
Top Models by Score
Score vs Total Cost
Response Time (avg)
Score vs Response Time (avg)
Total Output Tokens
Score vs Total Output Tokens
Quick Compare
Qwen3.5-27BmediumvsGPT-5.6 TerralowQwen3.5-27BmediumvsGLM 5.3 FlashXmaxQwen3.5-27BmediumvsQwen3.8 Flash NextlowQwen3.5-27BmediumvsClaude Fable 5.1highQwen3.5-27BmediumvsGemini 3.8 FlashmediumQwen3.5-27BmediumvsGPT-5.4 MinimediumQwen3.5-27BmediumvsGPT-5.4 NanomediumQwen3.5-27BmediumvsQwen3.7 MaxnoneQwen3.5-27BmediumvsNemotron 3 UltramediumFree AvailableQwen3.5-27BmediumvsGemini 3.5 Flashmedium
Category Breakdown
| Category | Score | Consistency | Tests Correct |
|---|---|---|---|
| Anti-AI Tricks | 8.7 | 7.9 | |
| Coding | 10.0 | 10.0 | |
| Combined | 10.0 | 10.0 | |
| Data parsing and extraction | 10.0 | 10.0 | |
| Domain specific | 5.3 | 10.0 | |
| General Intelligence | 6.1 | 3.1 | |
| Instructions following | 10.0 | 10.0 | |
| Puzzle Solving | 8.2 | 7.7 | |
| Tool Calling | 10.0 | 10.0 |