Model Comparison
Qwen3 4B (Reasoning)
vs. Qwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning)
Comparing 2 AI models · 12 benchmarks · Alibaba
Recommended Pick
Al Qwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning) 12 metric wins Strongest on: Value, Input price, Output price
Best Value
Qwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning)
100.0 value score
33.8 reasoning / $0.06/1M
Lowest Price
Qwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning)
$0.03/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Qwen3 4B (Reasoning)
39.3 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Qwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning)
13.7 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 4B (Non-reasoning) has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
Qwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning) is 3.7x cheaper on input tokens than Qwen3 4B (Reasoning).
Reasoning gap
Qwen3 4B (Reasoning) leads Qwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning) by 5.5 points on reasoning.
Top-pick rationale
Qwen3.5 4B (Non-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 4B (Reasoning)
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Qwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning)
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | Al Qwen3 4B (Reasoning) | Top Pick Al Qwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.11/1M | $0.03/1M |
| Output Cost | $1.26/1M | $0.15/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.40/1M | $0.06/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Alibaba | Alibaba |
| Release Date | Apr 28, 2025 | Mar 2, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | — | 98.2 tok/s |
| TTFT | — | 407ms |
| Latency | — | 407ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 17.6 | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 39.3 | 33.8 |
| Intelligence | 14.2 | 22.6 |
| Coding | — | 13.7 |
| Math | 22.3 | — |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 52.2% | 71.2% |
| MMLU Pro | 69.6% | — |
| HLE | 5.1% | 7.5% |
| LiveCodeBench | 46.5% | — |
| MATH 500 | 93.3% | — |
| AIME 2025 | 22.3% | — |
| AIME (Original) | 65.7% | — |
| SciCode | 3.5% | 18.3% |
| LCR | 0.0% | 28.3% |
| IFBench | 32.5% | 33.3% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 19.0% | 87.7% |
| TerminalBench Hard | — | 11.4% |
Key Takeaways
Qwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning) offers the best value at $0.03/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Qwen3 4B (Reasoning) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 39.3 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Qwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning) reaches a 13.7 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 4B (Reasoning)
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
Qwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Code generation
- Software development
