Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Saba vs Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15

Saba costs 2.6x less per output token than Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 ($0.60 vs $1.56 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.

SabaMistral AI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.60
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15Qwen
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.56
vs $0.60 vs $1.56 per 1M output tokens. Saba is 2.6x cheaper.

Saba or Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15: which to pick

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

Pick Saba for output tokens 2.6x cheaper ($0.60 vs $1.56 per million).

No benchmark has tested both yet. Saba has results on AA Intelligence Index, GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) and Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run); Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 on Design Arena: websites, Design Arena: UI components and Design Arena: game dev. Compare them on price and context instead.

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
Saba not benchmarked, Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 not benchmarked.
Widest category
None yet: no category has been tested on both models.
Widest single gap
None yet: no benchmark has tested both models.
Output price
Saba $0.60 against Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 $1.56 per million output tokens, 2.6x apart.
Context window
Saba takes 33K tokens, Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 1M.

Benchmark by benchmark

Every board either model has a result on, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale. Only one model is measured on each, so no row names a leader.

IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
Intelligence benchmarks for Saba and Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15
BenchmarkSabaQwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15Leader
AA Intelligence Index6.5Not measuredOnly Saba measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
Reasoning benchmarks for Saba and Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15
BenchmarkSabaQwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15Leader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)42.4%Not measuredOnly Saba measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)4.3%Not measuredOnly Saba measured
Neither model has a result on the other 20 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
Knowledge benchmarks for Saba and Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15
BenchmarkSabaQwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15Leader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)61.1%Not measuredOnly Saba measured
Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards measured
Web design benchmarks for Saba and Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15
BenchmarkSabaQwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15Leader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1187Only Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured1175Only Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1105Only Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1135Only Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured1118Only Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1166Only Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 measured
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1107Only Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 measured
Design Arena: ASCII artNot measured1094Only Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board 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

Saba$0.0005Fits in one request
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15$0.0010Fits in one request

Saba costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Saba$0.012Exceeds the context window
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15$0.018Fits in one request

Saba costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Saba$0.046Exceeds the context window
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15$0.068Fits in one request

Saba 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 Saba and Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15
SpecificationMistral SabaQwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15
MakerMistral AIQwen
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedFebruary 17, 2025February 16, 2026
Context window33K1M
Input $/Mtok$0.20$0.26
Output $/Mtok$0.60$1.56
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Saba better than Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Saba for output tokens 2.6x cheaper ($0.60 vs $1.56 per million).

Which is cheaper, Saba or Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15?

Saba costs $0.20 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 costs $0.26 and $1.56. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Saba or Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15?

Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15, with 1M tokens against 33K.

Has any benchmark tested both Saba and Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15?

No benchmark has tested both yet. Saba has results on AA Intelligence Index, GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) and Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run); Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 on Design Arena: websites, Design Arena: UI components and Design Arena: game dev. Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 22, 2026.

Compare next