Model Comparison
Qwen3.5 27B (Reasoning)
vs. Qwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning)
Comparing 2 AI models · 7 benchmarks · Alibaba
Recommended Pick
AlQwen3.5 27B (Reasoning)10 metric winsStrongest on: Throughput, Reasoning, Intelligence
Best Value
Qwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning)
100.0 value score
31.6 reasoning / $0.06/1M
Lowest Price
Qwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning)
$0.03/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Qwen3.5 27B (Reasoning)
47.3 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Qwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning)
20.3 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 10x cheaper on input tokens than Qwen3.5 27B (Reasoning).
Speed gap
Qwen3.5 27B (Reasoning) generates about 3.2x as many tokens per second as Qwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning).
Reasoning gap
Qwen3.5 27B (Reasoning) leads Qwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning) by 15.7 points on reasoning.
Top-pick rationale
Qwen3.5 27B (Reasoning) wins 10 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.
Qwen3.5 27B (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?
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 | Top Pick Al Qwen3.5 27B (Reasoning) | Al Qwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.30/1M | $0.03/1M |
| Output Cost | $2.40/1M | $0.15/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.82/1M | $0.06/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Alibaba | Alibaba |
| Release Date | Feb 24, 2026 | Mar 2, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 86.3 tok/s | 27.1 tok/s |
| TTFT | 1409ms | 430ms |
| Latency | 24595ms | 430ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 10.9 | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 47.3 | 31.6 |
| Intelligence | 33.8 | 16.0 |
| Coding | — | 20.3 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 85.8% | 71.2% |
| HLE | 22.2% | 7.5% |
| SciCode | 39.5% | 18.3% |
| LCR | 67.3% | 28.3% |
| IFBench | 75.6% | 33.3% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 93.9% | 87.7% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 32.6% | 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.
Qwen3.5 27B (Reasoning) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 47.3 reasoning score,combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Qwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning) reaches a 20.3 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 27B (Reasoning)
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
Qwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Code generation
- Software development
