LongCat 2.0 vs Qwen3.5-Flash
Qwen3.5-Flash costs 4.6x less per output token than LongCat 2.0 ($0.26 vs $1.20 per million). Updated October 23, 2026; 1 benchmarks have a result for both.
LongCat 2.0 or Qwen3.5-Flash: which to pick
Only Qwen3.5-Flash has a coding score, 41.1 on the Vibe Coding Index; LongCat 2.0 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick LongCat 2.0 for a larger context window (1.05M against 1M tokens) and work measured by ALE-Bench, where it leads.
- Shared results
- 1
- LongCat 2.0 only
- 7
- Qwen3.5-Flash only
- 54
- Like-for-like categories
- 1 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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Only Qwen3.5-Flash has a coding score, so no call is made.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
No call
Only LongCat 2.0 has a AA Intelligence Index result, 19.1.
Directional only
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
No call
Only LongCat 2.0 has a AA Agentic Index result, 14.0.
Directional only
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
No call
Only Qwen3.5-Flash has a GPQA Diamond result, 82.8%.
Directional only
Math
AIME
No call
Only Qwen3.5-Flash has a AIME result, 92.5%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
No call
Only Qwen3.5-Flash has a MMLU Pro result, 84.1%.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
LongCat 2.0
LongCat 2.0 takes 1.05M tokens against 1M.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen3.5-Flash
LongCat 2.0 $0.0009, Qwen3.5-Flash $0.0002 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
No call
Only Qwen3.5-Flash has the number, $0.40.
Directional only
At a glance
- Coding index
- LongCat 2.0 not benchmarked, Qwen3.5-Flash 41.1 from 2 benchmarks.
- Widest category
- Coding, 17.6 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- ALE-Bench: LongCat 2.0 793.5 against Qwen3.5-Flash 265.9, 17.6 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- LongCat 2.0 $1.20 against Qwen3.5-Flash $0.26 per million output tokens, 4.6x apart.
- Context window
- LongCat 2.0 takes 1.05M tokens, Qwen3.5-Flash 1M.
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.
| Category | LongCat 2.0 | Bars | Qwen3.5-Flash | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 1 | 0 | ||
| All shared boards | 1 | 0 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index10
| Benchmark | LongCat 2.0 | Qwen3.5-Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | Not measured | 1244 | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| AA Coding Index | 45.3 | Not measured | Only LongCat 2.0 measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 83.3% | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | Not measured | 64.4% | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| SciCode | 36.3% | Not measured | Only LongCat 2.0 measured |
| ALE-Bench | 793.5 | 265.9 | LongCat 2.0 |
| LMArena Text: coding | Not measured | 1412 | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | Not measured | 1416 | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| LMArena WebDev: React | Not measured | 1229 | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | Not measured | 1291 | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 33 boards here | |||
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | LongCat 2.0 | Qwen3.5-Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 19.1 | Not measured | Only LongCat 2.0 measured |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | Not measured | 143.5 | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | LongCat 2.0 | Qwen3.5-Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | 14.0 | Not measured | Only LongCat 2.0 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 41 boards here | |||
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | LongCat 2.0 | Qwen3.5-Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | Not measured | 82.8% | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| MMMU Pro (Vals AI) | Not measured | 81.9% | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 78.0% | Not measured | Only LongCat 2.0 measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 33.7% | Not measured | Only LongCat 2.0 measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | Not measured | 82.3% | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| Chess puzzles | Not measured | 14.0% | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| Mystery game puzzles | Not measured | 20.0% | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | Not measured | 1403 | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| LMArena Text: expert | Not measured | 1407 | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | Not measured | 1409 | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | LongCat 2.0 | Qwen3.5-Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME | Not measured | 92.5% | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| OTIS Mock AIME | Not measured | 84.4% | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | Not measured | 18.2% | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| LMArena Text: math | Not measured | 1407 | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | Not measured | 1413 | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index12 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | LongCat 2.0 | Qwen3.5-Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | Not measured | 84.1% | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 84.3% | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| CaseLaw (Vals AI) | Not measured | 56.0% | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | Not measured | 63.6% | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | Not measured | 72.2% | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| MortgageTax (Vals AI) | Not measured | 67.4% | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| MedCode (Vals AI) | Not measured | 33.0% | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| SimpleQA Verified | Not measured | 20.3% | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| LMArena Text: science | Not measured | 1415 | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | Not measured | 1407 | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | Not measured | 1397 | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | Not measured | 1394 | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here | |||
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | LongCat 2.0 | Qwen3.5-Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 9 boards here | |||
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index22 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | LongCat 2.0 | Qwen3.5-Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| SAGE (Vals AI) | Not measured | 42.5% | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | Not measured | 70.6% | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 65.0% | Not measured | Only LongCat 2.0 measured |
| DTBench | Not measured | 82.9% | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| LMCA | Not measured | 29.1% | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| LMArena Text | Not measured | 1397 | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | Not measured | 1375 | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | Not measured | 1343 | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| LMArena Text: English | Not measured | 1404 | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| LMArena Text: non-English | Not measured | 1385 | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | Not measured | 1446 | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| LMArena Text: German | Not measured | 1391 | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | Not measured | 1369 | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| LMArena Text: Korean | Not measured | 1344 | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| LMArena Text: French | Not measured | 1413 | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | Not measured | 1399 | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | Not measured | 1380 | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| LMArena Text: Polish | Not measured | 1376 | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | Not measured | 1393 | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | Not measured | 1392 | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | Not measured | 1369 | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | Not measured | 1347 | Only Qwen3.5-Flash measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 26 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | LongCat 2.0 | Qwen3.5-Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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
Qwen3.5-Flash costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Qwen3.5-Flash costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Qwen3.5-Flash 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.
| Specification | Meituan LongCat 2.0 | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Meituan | Qwen |
| Weights | Open weights | No public weights listed |
| Released | July 20, 2026 | February 25, 2026 |
| Context window | 1.05M | 1M |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.30 | $0.065 |
| Output $/Mtok | $1.20 | $0.26 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | 41.1 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 2 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | $0.40 |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is LongCat 2.0 better than Qwen3.5-Flash for coding?
Only Qwen3.5-Flash has a coding score, 41.1 on the Vibe Coding Index; LongCat 2.0 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick LongCat 2.0 for a larger context window (1.05M against 1M tokens) and work measured by ALE-Bench, where it leads.
Which is cheaper, LongCat 2.0 or Qwen3.5-Flash?
LongCat 2.0 costs $0.30 per million input tokens and $1.20 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5-Flash costs $0.065 and $0.26. Cost per solved task is known for Qwen3.5-Flash only.
Which has the bigger context window, LongCat 2.0 or Qwen3.5-Flash?
LongCat 2.0, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.
How many benchmarks is the LongCat 2.0 vs Qwen3.5-Flash comparison based on?
1 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-Flash's on 2. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.