Model Comparison
Qwen3.5 27B (Non-reasoning)
vs. Qwen3 VL 8B (Reasoning)
Comparing 2 AI models · 10 benchmarks · Alibaba
Recommended Pick
AlQwen3.5 27B (Non-reasoning)11 metric winsStrongest on: Value, Latency, Reasoning
Best Value
Qwen3.5 27B (Non-reasoning)
100.0 value score
42.2 reasoning / $0.82/1M
Lowest Price
Qwen3 VL 8B (Reasoning)
$0.18/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Qwen3.5 27B (Non-reasoning)
42.2 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
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 27B (Non-reasoning) has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
Qwen3 VL 8B (Reasoning) is 1.7x cheaper on input tokens than Qwen3.5 27B (Non-reasoning).
Speed gap
Qwen3 VL 8B (Reasoning) generates about 1.5x as many tokens per second as Qwen3.5 27B (Non-reasoning).
Reasoning gap
Qwen3.5 27B (Non-reasoning) leads Qwen3 VL 8B (Reasoning) by 15.6 points on reasoning.
Top-pick rationale
Qwen3.5 27B (Non-reasoning) wins 11 measurable categories, including Value, Latency, Reasoning, Intelligence.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Qwen3.5 27B (Non-reasoning)
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Qwen3 VL 8B (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 (Non-reasoning) | Al Qwen3 VL 8B (Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.30/1M | $0.18/1M |
| Output Cost | $2.40/1M | $2.10/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.82/1M | $0.66/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Alibaba | Alibaba |
| Release Date | Feb 24, 2026 | Oct 14, 2025 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 93.0 tok/s | 135.7 tok/s |
| TTFT | 1437ms | 1082ms |
| Latency | 1437ms | 15820ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 100.0 | 78.8 |
| Reasoning Score | 42.2 | 26.6 |
| Intelligence | 29.3 | 10.6 |
| Math | — | 30.7 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 84.2% | 57.9% |
| MMLU Pro | — | 74.9% |
| HLE | 13.2% | 3.3% |
| LiveCodeBench | — | 35.3% |
| AIME 2025 | — | 30.7% |
| SciCode | 36.7% | 21.9% |
| LCR | 55.7% | 31.0% |
| IFBench | 46.9% | 39.9% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 87.1% | 22.5% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 31.8% | 3.8% |
Key Takeaways
Qwen3 VL 8B (Reasoning) offers the best value at $0.18/1M,making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Qwen3.5 27B (Non-reasoning) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 42.2 reasoning score,combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens,suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
Qwen3.5 27B (Non-reasoning)
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
Qwen3 VL 8B (Reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
Recommended Comparisons
Popular alternatives
