Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Qwen3.5-27B vs Qwen3.7 Max

Qwen3.7 Max leads Qwen3.5-27B on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 29.5 to 22.9, and Qwen3.5-27B costs 2.8x less per output token ($1.56 vs $4.425 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 13 benchmarks have a result for both.

Qwen3.5-27BQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.56
0
Qwen3.7 MaxQwen
Coding
54.1
Overall
61.7
Output $/M
$4.425
13
vs boards won of 13 shared

Qwen3.5-27B or Qwen3.7 Max: which to pick

Only Qwen3.7 Max has a coding score, 54.1 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3.5-27B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Qwen3.5-27B for output tokens 2.8x cheaper ($1.56 vs $4.425 per million).

Shared results
13
Qwen3.5-27B only
40
Qwen3.7 Max only
46
Like-for-like categories
5 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
Qwen3.5-27B not benchmarked, Qwen3.7 Max 54.1 from 3 benchmarks.
Widest category
Coding, 23.5 points apart on average over 5 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
ALE-Bench: Qwen3.5-27B 349.4 against Qwen3.7 Max 1189.4, 28.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Qwen3.5-27B $1.56 against Qwen3.7 Max $4.425 per million output tokens, 2.8x apart.
Context window
Qwen3.5-27B takes 262K tokens, Qwen3.7 Max 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.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryQwen3.5-27BBarsQwen3.7 MaxTies
Coding05
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
Reasoning02
General04
All shared boards013
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index05
Coding benchmarks for Qwen3.5-27B and Qwen3.7 Max
BenchmarkQwen3.5-27BQwen3.7 MaxLeader
LMArena WebDev13581515Qwen3.7 Max
AA Coding IndexNot measured66.0Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured87.1%Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured68.8%Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured47.7%Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
Code migration (Vals AI)Not measured13.1%Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)Not measured61.0%Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
SciCodeNot measured49.5%Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)32.6%50.8%Qwen3.7 Max
WeirdML39.5%Not measuredOnly Qwen3.5-27B measured
ALE-Bench349.41189.4Qwen3.7 Max
LMArena Text: coding1427Not measuredOnly Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1431Not measuredOnly Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena WebDev: React13461514Qwen3.7 Max
LMArena WebDev: HTML13861512Qwen3.7 Max
Neither model has a result on the other 24 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for Qwen3.5-27B and Qwen3.7 Max
BenchmarkQwen3.5-27BQwen3.7 MaxLeader
AA Intelligence Index22.929.5Qwen3.7 Max
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured154.0Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for Qwen3.5-27B and Qwen3.7 Max
BenchmarkQwen3.5-27BQwen3.7 MaxLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured22.5Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
Design Arena: agents building web appsNot measured1208Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack appsNot measured1191Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile appsNot measured1155Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
Design Arena: agents building Android appsNot measured1159Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot gamesNot measured1187Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
Design Arena: agents building gamesNot measured1161Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
Design Arena: HTML slidesNot measured1108Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
Design Arena: PowerPoint slidesNot measured1171Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)Not measured47.8%Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)Not measured15.8%Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)Not measured25.5%Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)Not measured57.0%Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
τ²-Bench Telecom93.9%94.7%Qwen3.7 Max
Vending-Bench 2$202Not measuredOnly Qwen3.5-27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 26 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Reasoning benchmarks for Qwen3.5-27B and Qwen3.7 Max
BenchmarkQwen3.5-27BQwen3.7 MaxLeader
GPQA DiamondNot measured90.2%Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)85.8%92.3%Qwen3.7 Max
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)23.9%40.5%Qwen3.7 Max
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured90.9%Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
SimpleBenchNot measured70.4%Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
Chess puzzlesNot measured26.0%Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured32.0%Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
EBR-benchNot measured9.5%Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1415Not measuredOnly Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Text: expert1427Not measuredOnly Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1429Not measuredOnly Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Vision: diagrams1249Not measuredOnly Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Vision: homework1256Not measuredOnly Qwen3.5-27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for Qwen3.5-27B and Qwen3.7 Max
BenchmarkQwen3.5-27BQwen3.7 MaxLeader
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured95.6%Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3Not measured64.6%Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
FrontierMath, tier 4Not measured34.1%Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
ProofBenchNot measured26.0%Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
LMArena Text: math1429Not measuredOnly Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1429Not measuredOnly Qwen3.5-27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for Qwen3.5-27B and Qwen3.7 Max
BenchmarkQwen3.5-27BQwen3.7 MaxLeader
MMLU ProNot measured89.3%Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured84.9%Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured63.7%Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured75.3%Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
MedCode (Vals AI)Not measured38.8%Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
SimpleQA VerifiedNot measured55.8%Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
LMArena Text: science1437Not measuredOnly Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1425Not measuredOnly Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1405Not measuredOnly Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1399Not measuredOnly Qwen3.5-27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Qwen3.5-27B and Qwen3.7 Max
BenchmarkQwen3.5-27BQwen3.7 MaxLeader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1274Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured1267Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1264Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1275Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured1265Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1275Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1216Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
Design Arena: ASCII artNot measured1211Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
General benchmarks for Qwen3.5-27B and Qwen3.7 Max
BenchmarkQwen3.5-27BQwen3.7 MaxLeader
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured79.4%Only Qwen3.7 Max measured
IFBench75.6%80.5%Qwen3.7 Max
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)77.7%79.0%Qwen3.7 Max
DTBench82.4%92.3%Qwen3.7 Max
LMCA34.0%44.0%Qwen3.7 Max
LMArena Text1409Not measuredOnly Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1393Not measuredOnly Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1362Not measuredOnly Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Vision1241Not measuredOnly Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Text: English1425Not measuredOnly Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Text: non-English1390Not measuredOnly Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1478Not measuredOnly Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Text: German1392Not measuredOnly Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1346Not measuredOnly Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Text: Korean1359Not measuredOnly Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Text: French1410Not measuredOnly Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1407Not measuredOnly Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Text: Russian1390Not measuredOnly Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Text: Polish1375Not measuredOnly Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1410Not measuredOnly Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1413Not measuredOnly Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1380Not measuredOnly Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1363Not measuredOnly Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Vision: English1246Not measuredOnly Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Vision: Chinese1301Not measuredOnly Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Vision: reading text1246Not measuredOnly Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Vision: humor1227Not measuredOnly Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Vision: captioning1170Not measuredOnly Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing things1210Not measuredOnly Qwen3.5-27B measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing1224Not measuredOnly 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
Image generation benchmarks for Qwen3.5-27B and Qwen3.7 Max
BenchmarkQwen3.5-27BQwen3.7 MaxLeader
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

Qwen3.5-27B$0.0010Fits in one request
Qwen3.7 Max$0.0037Fits in one request

Qwen3.5-27B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Qwen3.5-27B$0.014Fits in one request
Qwen3.7 Max$0.087Fits in one request

Qwen3.5-27B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Qwen3.5-27B$0.055Fits in one request
Qwen3.7 Max$0.339Fits in one request

Qwen3.5-27B 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 Qwen3.5-27B and Qwen3.7 Max
SpecificationQwen3.5-27BQwen3.7 Max
MakerQwenQwen
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedFebruary 25, 2026May 21, 2026
Context window262K1M
Input $/Mtok$0.195$1.475
Output $/Mtok$1.56$4.425
Coding indexNot benchmarked54.1
Independent measurements behind it13
Cost per solved taskNot computable$4.69
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Qwen3.5-27B better than Qwen3.7 Max for coding?

Only Qwen3.7 Max has a coding score, 54.1 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3.5-27B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Qwen3.5-27B for output tokens 2.8x cheaper ($1.56 vs $4.425 per million).

Which is cheaper, Qwen3.5-27B or Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.5-27B costs $0.195 per million input tokens and $1.56 per million output tokens; Qwen3.7 Max costs $1.475 and $4.425. Cost per solved task is known for Qwen3.7 Max only.

Which has the bigger context window, Qwen3.5-27B or Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max, with 1M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks is the Qwen3.5-27B vs Qwen3.7 Max comparison based on?

13 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Qwen3.5-27B's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Qwen3.7 Max's on 3. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next