Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

LongCat 2.0 vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B

LongCat 2.0 leads Qwen3.5-122B-A10B on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 19.1 to 17.7, and LongCat 2.0 costs 1.7x less per output token ($1.20 vs $2.08 per million). Updated October 23, 2026; 6 benchmarks have a result for both.

LongCat 2.0Meituan
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.20
3
Qwen3.5-122B-A10BQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$2.08
3
vs boards won of 6 shared

LongCat 2.0 or Qwen3.5-122B-A10B: which to pick

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

Pick LongCat 2.0 for output tokens 1.7x cheaper ($1.20 vs $2.08 per million) and a larger context window (1.05M against 262K tokens).

Shared results
6
LongCat 2.0 only
2
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B only
45
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
LongCat 2.0 not benchmarked, Qwen3.5-122B-A10B not benchmarked.
Widest category
General, 11.3 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR): LongCat 2.0 65.0% against Qwen3.5-122B-A10B 76.3%, 11.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
LongCat 2.0 $1.20 against Qwen3.5-122B-A10B $2.08 per million output tokens, 1.7x apart.
Context window
LongCat 2.0 takes 1.05M tokens, Qwen3.5-122B-A10B 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
CategoryLongCat 2.0BarsQwen3.5-122B-A10BTies
Coding11
Intelligence10
Reasoning11
General01
All shared boards33
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index11
Coding benchmarks for LongCat 2.0 and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkLongCat 2.0Qwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
LMArena WebDevNot measured1361Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
AA Coding Index45.343.3LongCat 2.0
SciCode36.3%39.7%Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured31.1%Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
ALE-Bench793.5Not measuredOnly LongCat 2.0 measured
LMArena Text: codingNot measured1436Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Text: software and ITNot measured1436Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1352Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1352Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B 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 LongCat 2.0 and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkLongCat 2.0Qwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
AA Intelligence Index19.117.7LongCat 2.0
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for LongCat 2.0 and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkLongCat 2.0Qwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
AA Agentic Index14.0Not measuredOnly LongCat 2.0 measured
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured93.6%Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 40 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11
Reasoning benchmarks for LongCat 2.0 and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkLongCat 2.0Qwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)78.0%85.7%Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)33.7%25.2%LongCat 2.0
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured17.0%Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Text: hard promptsNot measured1421Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Text: expertNot measured1431Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in EnglishNot measured1431Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1249Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1261Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for LongCat 2.0 and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkLongCat 2.0Qwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
LMArena Text: mathNot measured1431Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1431Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for LongCat 2.0 and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkLongCat 2.0Qwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
LMArena Text: scienceNot measured1433Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcareNot measured1423Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Text: legal and governmentNot measured1422Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Text: business and financeNot measured1414Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for LongCat 2.0 and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkLongCat 2.0Qwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
General benchmarks for LongCat 2.0 and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkLongCat 2.0Qwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
IFBenchNot measured75.7%Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)65.0%76.3%Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
DTBenchNot measured84.3%Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMCANot measured32.2%Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena TextNot measured1418Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Text: instruction followingNot measured1400Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Text: creative writingNot measured1368Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena VisionNot measured1244Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Text: EnglishNot measured1428Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Text: non-EnglishNot measured1401Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured1463Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1425Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1367Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1353Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1443Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1425Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Text: RussianNot measured1400Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1399Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Text: multi-turnNot measured1417Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Text: longer queriesNot measured1411Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Text: writing and languageNot measured1387Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and mediaNot measured1366Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1249Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1301Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1251Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1243Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1220Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 21 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for LongCat 2.0 and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkLongCat 2.0Qwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
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

LongCat 2.0$0.0009Fits in one request
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B$0.0013Fits in one request

LongCat 2.0 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

LongCat 2.0$0.019Fits in one request
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B$0.019Fits in one request

LongCat 2.0 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

LongCat 2.0$0.072Fits in one request
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B$0.073Fits in one request

LongCat 2.0 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 LongCat 2.0 and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
SpecificationMeituan LongCat 2.0Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
MakerMeituanQwen
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedJuly 20, 2026February 25, 2026
Context window1.05M262K
Input $/Mtok$0.30$0.26
Output $/Mtok$1.20$2.08
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it01
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is LongCat 2.0 better than Qwen3.5-122B-A10B for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick LongCat 2.0 for output tokens 1.7x cheaper ($1.20 vs $2.08 per million) and a larger context window (1.05M against 262K tokens).

Which is cheaper, LongCat 2.0 or Qwen3.5-122B-A10B?

LongCat 2.0 costs $0.30 per million input tokens and $1.20 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5-122B-A10B costs $0.26 and $2.08. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, LongCat 2.0 or Qwen3.5-122B-A10B?

LongCat 2.0, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks is the LongCat 2.0 vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B comparison based on?

6 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 23, 2026. LongCat 2.0's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next