Model Comparison
Qwen3 14B (Non-reasoning)
vs. Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning)
Comparing 2 AI models · 12 benchmarks · Alibaba
Recommended Pick
Al Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning) 12 metric wins Strongest on: Value, Input price, Output price
Best Value
Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning)
100.0 value score
39.6 reasoning / $0.11/1M
Lowest Price
Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning)
$0.10/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Qwen3 14B (Non-reasoning)
41.3 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning)
28.7 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 2.3x cheaper on input tokens than Qwen3 14B (Non-reasoning).
Speed gap
Qwen3 14B (Non-reasoning) generates about 1.1x as many tokens per second as Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning).
Reasoning gap
Qwen3 14B (Non-reasoning) leads Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning) by 1.7 points on reasoning.
Top-pick rationale
Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning) wins 12 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.
Qwen3 14B (Non-reasoning)
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Qwen3.5 9B (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 | Al Qwen3 14B (Non-reasoning) | Top Pick Al Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.23/1M | $0.10/1M |
| Output Cost | $0.82/1M | $0.15/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.38/1M | $0.11/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Alibaba | Alibaba |
| Release Date | Apr 28, 2025 | Mar 2, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 65.5 tok/s | 61.2 tok/s |
| TTFT | 1096ms | 1119ms |
| Latency | 1096ms | 33822ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 30.8 | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 41.3 | 39.6 |
| Intelligence | 7.0 | 25.0 |
| Coding | — | 28.7 |
| Math | 58.0 | — |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 47.0% | 80.6% |
| MMLU Pro | 67.5% | — |
| HLE | 4.2% | 13.3% |
| LiveCodeBench | 28.0% | — |
| MATH 500 | 87.1% | — |
| AIME 2025 | 58.0% | — |
| AIME (Original) | 28.0% | — |
| SciCode | 26.5% | 27.5% |
| LCR | 0.0% | 59.0% |
| IFBench | 23.9% | 66.7% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 32.2% | 86.8% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 5.3% | 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 14B (Non-reasoning) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 41.3 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning) reaches a 28.7 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
Qwen3 14B (Non-reasoning)
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Code generation
- Software development
