Model Comparison
3.5 (1210)
vs. Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Non-reasoning)
Comparing 2 AI models · 11 benchmarks · OpenChat, Alibaba
Recommended Pick
AlQwen3.5 397B A17B (Non-reasoning)5 metric winsStrongest on: Throughput, Reasoning, Intelligence
Lowest Price
3.5 (1210)
$0.00/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Non-reasoning)
45.6 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Price gap
3.5 (1210) is ∞x cheaper on input tokens than Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Non-reasoning).
Reasoning gap
Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Non-reasoning) leads 3.5 (1210) by 33.3 points on reasoning.
Top-pick rationale
Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Non-reasoning) wins 5 measurable categories, including Throughput, Reasoning, Intelligence, GPQA.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
3.5 (1210)
OpenChat
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Non-reasoning)
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Chat with leading AI models
Use Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini alongside with EU-Hosted Models like Deepseek, Qwen & Kimi.
EU-hosted inference
Servers in Germany & Finland. Designed to meet strict GDPR and ISO 27001 compliance requirements.
Full Comparison
| Metric | Op 3.5 (1210) | Top Pick Al Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Non-reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.00/1M | $0.60/1M |
| Output Cost | $0.00/1M | $3.60/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | — | $1.35/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | OpenChat | Alibaba |
| Release Date | Dec 18, 2023 | Feb 16, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | — | 61.4 tok/s |
| TTFT | — | 1951ms |
| Latency | — | 1951ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | — | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 12.3 | 45.6 |
| Intelligence | 3.0 | 32.0 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 23.0% | 86.1% |
| MMLU Pro | 31.0% | — |
| HLE | 4.8% | 18.8% |
| LiveCodeBench | 11.5% | — |
| MATH 500 | 30.7% | — |
| AIME (Original) | 0.0% | — |
| SciCode | — | 41.1% |
| LCR | — | 58.0% |
| IFBench | — | 51.6% |
| TAU-bench v2 | — | 83.9% |
| TerminalBench Hard | — | 35.6% |
Key Takeaways
3.5 (1210) offers the best value at $0.00/1M,making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Non-reasoning) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 45.6 reasoning score,combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens,suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
3.5 (1210)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Non-reasoning)
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
