Model Comparison
Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning)
vs. Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Non-reasoning)
Comparing 2 AI models · 7 benchmarks · Alibaba
Recommended Pick
Al Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning) 10 metric wins Strongest on: TTFT, Latency, Reasoning
Best Value
Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Non-reasoning)
100.0 value score
41.9 reasoning / $0.84/1M
Lowest Price
Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Non-reasoning)
$0.38/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning)
44.5 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning)
31.6 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
Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Non-reasoning) has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Non-reasoning) is 1.1x cheaper on input tokens than Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning).
Speed gap
Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Non-reasoning) generates about 1.2x as many tokens per second as Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning).
Reasoning gap
Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning) leads Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Non-reasoning) by 2.6 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning) leads Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Non-reasoning) by 14.0 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 122B A10B (Non-reasoning)
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Non-reasoning)
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | Top Pick Al Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning) | Al Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Non-reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.40/1M | $0.38/1M |
| Output Cost | $3.20/1M | $2.25/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $1.10/1M | $0.84/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Alibaba | Alibaba |
| Release Date | Feb 24, 2026 | Apr 16, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 150.0 tok/s | 174.4 tok/s |
| TTFT | 1082ms | 1378ms |
| Latency | 1082ms | 1378ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 81.4 | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 44.5 | 41.9 |
| Intelligence | 35.9 | 31.5 |
| Coding | 31.6 | 17.6 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 82.7% | 81.7% |
| HLE | 14.8% | 12.5% |
| SciCode | 35.6% | 1.3% |
| LCR | 56.0% | 56.7% |
| IFBench | 50.8% | 36.2% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 84.5% | 85.1% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 29.5% | 25.8% |
Key Takeaways
Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Non-reasoning) offers the best value at $0.38/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 44.5 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning) reaches a 31.6 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 122B A10B (Non-reasoning)
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Non-reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
