Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp vs Qwen3.5-9B

DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp leads Qwen3.5-9B on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 34.8 to 13.3, and Qwen3.5-9B costs 8.8x less per output token ($0.15 vs $1.32 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 6 benchmarks have a result for both.

DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision ExpDeepSeek
Coding
No data
Overall
56.4
Output $/M
$1.32
6
Qwen3.5-9BQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.15
0
vs boards won of 6 shared

DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp or Qwen3.5-9B: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp for a larger context window (1.05M against 262K tokens).

Shared results
6
DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp only
8
Qwen3.5-9B only
9
Like-for-like categories
4 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp not benchmarked, Qwen3.5-9B not benchmarked.
Widest category
Coding, 30.9 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
AA Coding Index: DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp 65.0 against Qwen3.5-9B 23.5, 41.5 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp $1.32 against Qwen3.5-9B $0.15 per million output tokens, 8.8x apart.
Context window
DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp takes 1.05M tokens, Qwen3.5-9B 262K.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryDeepSeek V4 Flash Vision ExpBarsQwen3.5-9BTies
Coding20
Intelligence10
Reasoning20
General10
All shared boards60
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index20
Coding benchmarks for DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash Vision ExpQwen3.5-9BLeader
LiveBench coding37.6%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp measured
AA Coding Index65.023.5DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp
SciCode49.7%29.5%DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured24.2%Only Qwen3.5-9B measured
Terminal-BenchNot measured9.2%Only Qwen3.5-9B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash Vision ExpQwen3.5-9BLeader
AA Intelligence Index34.813.3DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured139.3Only Qwen3.5-9B measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash Vision ExpQwen3.5-9BLeader
AA Agentic Index47.5Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp measured
LiveBench research69.2%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp measured
LiveBench browser64.0%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp measured
LiveBench long agentic39.0%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp measured
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured86.8%Only Qwen3.5-9B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 36 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Reasoning benchmarks for DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash Vision ExpQwen3.5-9BLeader
LiveBench reasoning85.4%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)91.3%80.6%DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)34.5%14.9%DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured79.0%Only Qwen3.5-9B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 18 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
Math benchmarks for DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash Vision ExpQwen3.5-9BLeader
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured61.7%Only Qwen3.5-9B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
KnowledgeNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash Vision ExpQwen3.5-9BLeader
Neither model has a result on 18 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
Web design benchmarks for DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash Vision ExpQwen3.5-9BLeader
LiveBench design70.7%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp measured
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
General benchmarks for DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash Vision ExpQwen3.5-9BLeader
LiveBench data analysis79.5%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp measured
IFBenchNot measured66.7%Only Qwen3.5-9B measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)81.3%70.0%DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp
DTBenchNot measured71.2%Only Qwen3.5-9B measured
LMCANot measured24.5%Only Qwen3.5-9B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 41 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash Vision ExpQwen3.5-9BLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp$0.0011Fits in one request
Qwen3.5-9B$0.0002Fits in one request

Qwen3.5-9B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp$0.026Fits in one request
Qwen3.5-9B$0.0054Fits in one request

Qwen3.5-9B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp$0.101Fits in one request
Qwen3.5-9B$0.021Fits in one request

Qwen3.5-9B costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp and Qwen3.5-9B
SpecificationDeepSeek V4 Flash Vision ExpQwen3.5-9B
MakerDeepSeekQwen
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedAugust 21, 2026March 10, 2026
Context window1.05M262K
Input $/Mtok$0.44$0.10
Output $/Mtok$1.32$0.15
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it10
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp better than Qwen3.5-9B for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp for a larger context window (1.05M against 262K tokens).

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp or Qwen3.5-9B?

DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp costs $0.44 per million input tokens and $1.32 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5-9B costs $0.10 and $0.15. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp or Qwen3.5-9B?

DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks is the DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp vs Qwen3.5-9B comparison based on?

6 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Qwen3.5-9B's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next