#98 Qwen3.5-9B
none
Reached the allocated time limit (300 seconds) without receiving showcase output.
- Cost
- $0.000
- Time
- 300.0s
- Tokens
- 0 tok
Qwen
Release: 2026-03-02
Tested on: 2026-04-20 17:48
qwen/qwen3.5-9b::none
9BDenseOpen source
(medium)
(none)
Summary
Qwen3.5-9B scores 4.8 on AI BENCHY and ranks #98. It has N/A reliability, a 24.1% pass rate, $0.005 total cost, and 1.47s average response time.
What makes Qwen3.5-9B unique: Its total benchmark cost is unusually low for its score range. It is notably fast compared with similar models.
Model facts
Researched on 2026-08-12
- Parameters
- 9B
- Architecture
- Dense
- Availability
- Open source
- License
- Apache-2.0
4.8
Consistency
9.6
N/A
$0.005
Total Output Tokens
3,951
Total Input Tokens
0
Input Price
$0.100 / 1M
Output Price
$0.150 / 1M
Flaky tests
1
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 01:54 Re-test | 5.1 | 10.0 | $0.021 ↑ | Compare | |
| 2026-07-16 22:25 New test added | 5.1 | 10.0 | $0.021 ↑ | Compare | |
| 2026-06-04 13:30 New test added | 4.6 | 10.0 | $0.003 ↓ | Compare | |
| 2026-05-22 00:02 Suite changed | 4.6 | 10.0 | $0.005 | Compare | |
| 2026-05-08 13:28 Suite changed | 4.7 | 10.0 | $0.005 | Compare | |
| 2026-05-08 13:28 Suite changed | 4.7 | 10.0 | $0.005 | Compare | |
| 2026-04-20 17:48 First recorded run | 4.8 | N/A | $0.005 | 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-20 17:48 · First recorded run | 54/54 attempts | 4.8 | 9.6 | N/A | 4/18 | 1 | 3,951 | 0 | $0.005 | 1.47s |
| 2026-07-16 22:25 · New test added | 66/66 attempts | 5.1 | 9.7 | 10.0 | 4/22 | 1 | 37,484 | 144,407 | $0.021 | 19.17s |
| Difference | — | -0.3 | -0.1 | 0 | 0 | -33533 | -144407 | -$0.016 | -17701ms |
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
Qwen3.5-9BnonevsMiMo-V2.5noneQwen3.5-9BnonevsNorth Mini CodenoneFree AvailableQwen3.5-9BnonevsMercury 2.5lowQwen3.5-9BnonevsMiniMax M2.7mediumQwen3.5-9BnonevsQwen3 Coder NextnoneQwen3.5-9BnonevsMercury 2.5 PreviewlowQwen3.5-9BnonevsGranite 4.2 8BlowQwen3.5-9BnonevsLaguna S 2.1lowFree AvailableQwen3.5-9BnonevsMistral Small 4mediumQwen3.5-9BnonevsDeepSeek V3.2none
Category Breakdown
| Category | Score | Consistency | Tests Correct |
|---|---|---|---|
| Anti-AI Tricks | 3.1 | 9.9 | |
| Coding | 5.2 | 3.4 | |
| Combined | 3.0 | 10.0 | |
| Data parsing and extraction | 10.0 | 10.0 | |
| Domain specific | 3.0 | 10.0 | |
| General Intelligence | 4.4 | 9.9 | |
| Instructions following | 6.5 | 10.0 | |
| Puzzle Solving | 3.2 | 9.9 | |
| Tool Calling | 10.0 | 10.0 |