Model Comparison
Qwen3.5 0.8B (Non-reasoning)
vs. Qwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning)
Comparing 2 AI models · 7 benchmarks · Alibaba
Recommended Pick
Al Qwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning) 13 metric wins Strongest on: Throughput, TTFT, Latency
Best Value
Qwen3.5 0.8B (Non-reasoning)
100.0 value score
12.8 reasoning / $0.02/1M
Lowest Price
Qwen3.5 0.8B (Non-reasoning)
$0.01/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Qwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning)
33.8 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 0.8B (Non-reasoning) has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
Qwen3.5 0.8B (Non-reasoning) is 3.0x cheaper on input tokens than Qwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning).
Speed gap
Qwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning) generates about 2.4x as many tokens per second as Qwen3.5 0.8B (Non-reasoning).
Reasoning gap
Qwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning) leads Qwen3.5 0.8B (Non-reasoning) by 21.0 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
Qwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning) leads Qwen3.5 0.8B (Non-reasoning) by 12.7 points on coding.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Qwen3.5 0.8B (Non-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 Qwen3.5 0.8B (Non-reasoning) | Top Pick Al Qwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.01/1M | $0.03/1M |
| Output Cost | $0.05/1M | $0.15/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.02/1M | $0.06/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Alibaba | Alibaba |
| Release Date | Mar 2, 2026 | Mar 2, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 89.7 tok/s | 213.9 tok/s |
| TTFT | 252ms | 250ms |
| Latency | 252ms | 250ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 100.0 | 87.9 |
| Reasoning Score | 12.8 | 33.8 |
| Intelligence | 9.9 | 22.6 |
| Coding | 1.0 | 13.7 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 23.6% | 71.2% |
| HLE | 4.9% | 7.5% |
| SciCode | 2.9% | 18.3% |
| LCR | 6.7% | 28.3% |
| IFBench | 21.6% | 33.3% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 65.2% | 87.7% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 0.0% | 11.4% |
Key Takeaways
Qwen3.5 0.8B (Non-reasoning) offers the best value at $0.01/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Qwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 33.8 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
Qwen3.5 0.8B (Non-reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
Qwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning)
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
