Model Comparison
Hermes 3 - Llama-3.1 70B
vs. Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning)
Comparing 2 AI models · 11 benchmarks · Nous Research, Alibaba
Recommended Pick
Al Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning) 10 metric wins Strongest on: Value, Input price, Output price
Best Value
Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning)
100.0 value score
42.1 reasoning / $0.11/1M
Lowest Price
Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning)
$0.10/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning)
42.1 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning)
25.3 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Best value
Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning) has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning) is 3.0x cheaper on input tokens than Hermes 3 - Llama-3.1 70B.
Speed gap
Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning) generates about 2.1x as many tokens per second as Hermes 3 - Llama-3.1 70B.
Reasoning gap
Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning) leads Hermes 3 - Llama-3.1 70B by 19.9 points on reasoning.
Top-pick rationale
Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning) wins 10 measurable categories, including Value, Input price, Output price, Blended price.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Hermes 3 - Llama-3.1 70B
Nous Research
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning)
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | No Hermes 3 - Llama-3.1 70B | Top Pick Al Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.30/1M | $0.10/1M |
| Output Cost | $0.30/1M | $0.15/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.30/1M | $0.11/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Nous Research | Alibaba |
| Release Date | Aug 15, 2024 | Mar 2, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 31.9 tok/s | 65.7 tok/s |
| TTFT | 349ms | 645ms |
| Latency | 349ms | 31095ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 19.8 | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 22.2 | 42.1 |
| Intelligence | 10.6 | 32.4 |
| Coding | — | 25.3 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 40.1% | 80.6% |
| MMLU Pro | 57.1% | — |
| HLE | 4.1% | 13.3% |
| LiveCodeBench | 18.8% | — |
| MATH 500 | 53.8% | — |
| AIME (Original) | 2.3% | — |
| SciCode | 23.1% | 27.5% |
| LCR | — | 59.0% |
| IFBench | — | 66.7% |
| TAU-bench v2 | — | 86.8% |
| TerminalBench Hard | — | 24.2% |
Key Takeaways
Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning) offers the best value at $0.10/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 42.1 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning) reaches a 25.3 coding index, making it the top choice for software development and code generation tasks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens, suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
Hermes 3 - Llama-3.1 70B
- General-purpose AI
- Versatile applications
Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
