Nemotron 3.5 Lightning vs Qwen3.5-27B
Qwen3.5-27B leads Nemotron 3.5 Lightning on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 22.9 to 12.9, and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning costs 10.6x less per output token ($0.147 vs $1.56 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 5 benchmarks have a result for both.
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning or Qwen3.5-27B: which to pick
Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning has a coding score, 22.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3.5-27B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Qwen3.5-27B for work measured by AA Intelligence Index or GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.
- Shared results
- 5
- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning only
- 15
- Qwen3.5-27B only
- 48
- 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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning has a coding score, so no call is made.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Qwen3.5-27B
Qwen3.5-27B leads, 22.9 against 12.9.
Same board, both measured
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
No call
Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning has a AA Agentic Index result, 3.5.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
No call
Both take 262K tokens.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning $0.0001, Qwen3.5-27B $0.0010 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
No call
Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning has the number, $0.06.
Directional only
At a glance
- Coding index
- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 22.6 from 2 benchmarks, Qwen3.5-27B not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- General, 17.3 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- Long context reasoning (AA-LCR): Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 60.3% against Qwen3.5-27B 77.7%, 17.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning $0.147 against Qwen3.5-27B $1.56 per million output tokens, 10.6x apart.
- Context window
- Both take 262K tokens.
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 | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning | Bars | Qwen3.5-27B | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 1 | 0 | ||
| Intelligence | 0 | 1 | ||
| Reasoning | 0 | 2 | ||
| General | 0 | 1 | ||
| All shared boards | 1 | 4 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index10
| Benchmark | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning | Qwen3.5-27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | Not measured | 1358 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| AA Coding Index | 26.8 | Not measured | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | 52.8% | Not measured | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | 0.0% | Not measured | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| Code migration (Vals AI) | 3.0% | Not measured | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| ProgramBench (Vals AI) | 0.0% | Not measured | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI) | 10.9% | Not measured | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| CyberBench (Vals AI) | 29.5% | Not measured | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| SciCode | 32.1% | Not measured | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 32.6% | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| WeirdML | Not measured | 39.5% | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| ALE-Bench | 769.2 | 349.4 | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning |
| LMArena Text: coding | Not measured | 1427 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | Not measured | 1431 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena WebDev: React | Not measured | 1346 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | Not measured | 1386 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 23 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning | Qwen3.5-27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 12.9 | 22.9 | Qwen3.5-27B |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning | Qwen3.5-27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | 3.5 | Not measured | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| Finance Agent (Vals AI) | 18.5% | Not measured | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI) | 2.6% | Not measured | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| Legal Research Bench (Vals AI) | 2.9% | Not measured | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI) | 17.0% | Not measured | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | Not measured | 93.9% | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| Vending-Bench 2 | Not measured | $202 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
| Benchmark | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning | Qwen3.5-27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 74.3% | 85.8% | Qwen3.5-27B |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 10.6% | 23.9% | Qwen3.5-27B |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | Not measured | 1415 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Text: expert | Not measured | 1427 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | Not measured | 1429 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Vision: diagrams | Not measured | 1249 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Vision: homework | Not measured | 1256 | Only Qwen3.5-27B 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
| Benchmark | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning | Qwen3.5-27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text: math | Not measured | 1429 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | Not measured | 1429 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning | Qwen3.5-27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | 54.2% | Not measured | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| LMArena Text: science | Not measured | 1437 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | Not measured | 1425 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | Not measured | 1405 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | Not measured | 1399 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here | |||
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning | Qwen3.5-27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 9 boards here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning | Qwen3.5-27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | 4.3% | Not measured | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| IFBench | Not measured | 75.6% | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 60.3% | 77.7% | Qwen3.5-27B |
| DTBench | Not measured | 82.4% | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMCA | Not measured | 34.0% | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Text | Not measured | 1409 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | Not measured | 1393 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | Not measured | 1362 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Vision | Not measured | 1241 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Text: English | Not measured | 1425 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Text: non-English | Not measured | 1390 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | Not measured | 1478 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Text: German | Not measured | 1392 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | Not measured | 1346 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Text: Korean | Not measured | 1359 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Text: French | Not measured | 1410 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | Not measured | 1407 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | Not measured | 1390 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Text: Polish | Not measured | 1375 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | Not measured | 1410 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | Not measured | 1413 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | Not measured | 1380 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | Not measured | 1363 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Vision: English | Not measured | 1246 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Vision: Chinese | Not measured | 1301 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Vision: reading text | Not measured | 1246 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Vision: humor | Not measured | 1227 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Vision: captioning | Not measured | 1170 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Vision: recognizing things | Not measured | 1210 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Vision: creative writing | Not measured | 1224 | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning | Qwen3.5-27B | 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
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 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 | NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Lightning | Qwen3.5-27B |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | NVIDIA | Qwen |
| Weights | Open weights | Open weights |
| Released | August 11, 2026 | February 25, 2026 |
| Context window | 262K | 262K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.0534 | $0.195 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.147 | $1.56 |
| Coding index | 22.6 | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 2 | 1 |
| Cost per solved task | $0.06 | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Nemotron 3.5 Lightning better than Qwen3.5-27B for coding?
Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning has a coding score, 22.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3.5-27B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Qwen3.5-27B for work measured by AA Intelligence Index or GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.
Which is cheaper, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning or Qwen3.5-27B?
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning costs $0.0534 per million input tokens and $0.147 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5-27B costs $0.195 and $1.56. Cost per solved task is known for Nemotron 3.5 Lightning only.
Which has the bigger context window, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning or Qwen3.5-27B?
Neither: both take 262K tokens.
How many benchmarks is the Nemotron 3.5 Lightning vs Qwen3.5-27B comparison based on?
5 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Nemotron 3.5 Lightning's coding index rests on 2 independent benchmarks and Qwen3.5-27B's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.