Model Comparison
Qwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning)
vs. Qwen3 8B (Reasoning)
Comparing 2 AI models · 12 benchmarks · Alibaba
Recommended Pick
AlQwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning)13 metric winsStrongest on: Value, Input price, Output price
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 8B (Reasoning)
39.2 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 6.0x cheaper on input tokens than Qwen3 8B (Reasoning).
Speed gap
Qwen3 8B (Reasoning) generates about 2.4x as many tokens per second as Qwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning).
Reasoning gap
Qwen3 8B (Reasoning) leads Qwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning) by 7.6 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
Qwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning) leads Qwen3 8B (Reasoning) by 11.3 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 4B (Non-reasoning)
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Qwen3 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 4B (Non-reasoning) | Al Qwen3 8B (Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.03/1M | $0.18/1M |
| Output Cost | $0.15/1M | $2.10/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.06/1M | $0.66/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Alibaba | Alibaba |
| Release Date | Mar 2, 2026 | Apr 28, 2025 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 27.0 tok/s | 64.2 tok/s |
| TTFT | 430ms | 1493ms |
| Latency | 430ms | 32654ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 100.0 | 11.3 |
| Reasoning Score | 31.6 | 39.2 |
| Intelligence | 16.0 | 8.3 |
| Coding | 20.3 | 9.0 |
| Math | — | 19.0 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 71.2% | 58.9% |
| MMLU Pro | — | 74.3% |
| HLE | 7.5% | 4.2% |
| LiveCodeBench | — | 40.6% |
| MATH 500 | — | 90.4% |
| AIME 2025 | — | 19.0% |
| AIME (Original) | — | 74.7% |
| SciCode | 18.3% | 22.6% |
| LCR | 28.3% | 0.0% |
| IFBench | 33.3% | 33.5% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 87.7% | 27.8% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 11.4% | 2.3% |
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 8B (Reasoning) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 39.2 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 4B (Non-reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Code generation
- Software development
Qwen3 8B (Reasoning)
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
