Qwen3.5-27B vs Step 3.5 Flash
Qwen3.5-27B leads Step 3.5 Flash on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 22.9 to 17.0, and Step 3.5 Flash costs 5.2x less per output token ($0.30 vs $1.56 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 35 benchmarks have a result for both.
Qwen3.5-27B or Step 3.5 Flash: which to pick
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Qwen3.5-27B for work measured by LMArena Text: coding or LMArena Text: software and IT, where it leads.
- Shared results
- 35
- Qwen3.5-27B only
- 18
- Step 3.5 Flash only
- 0
- Like-for-like categories
- 7 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
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Qwen3.5-27B
Qwen3.5-27B leads, 22.9 against 17.0.
Same board, both measured
Long documents
Listed context window
No call
Both take 262K tokens.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Step 3.5 Flash
Qwen3.5-27B $0.0010, Step 3.5 Flash $0.0003 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Qwen3.5-27B not benchmarked, Step 3.5 Flash not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- Intelligence, 5.9 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- Long context reasoning (AA-LCR): Qwen3.5-27B 77.7% against Step 3.5 Flash 63.0%, 14.7 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Qwen3.5-27B $1.56 against Step 3.5 Flash $0.30 per million output tokens, 5.2x 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 | Qwen3.5-27B | Bars | Step 3.5 Flash | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 0 | 2 | 1 tie | |
| Intelligence | 1 | 0 | ||
| Agentic work | 0 | 1 | ||
| Reasoning | 4 | 1 | ||
| Math | 2 | 0 | ||
| Knowledge | 3 | 1 | ||
| General | 14 | 5 | ||
| All shared boards | 24 | 10 | 1 tie |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index02
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-27B | Step 3.5 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1358 | Not measured | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 32.6% | 32.6% | Tie |
| WeirdML | 39.5% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| ALE-Bench | 349.4 | Not measured | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1427 | 1436 | Step 3.5 Flash |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1431 | 1434 | Step 3.5 Flash |
| LMArena WebDev: React | 1346 | Not measured | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | 1386 | Not measured | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 31 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-27B | Step 3.5 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 22.9 | 17.0 | Qwen3.5-27B |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-27B | Step 3.5 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 93.9% | 94.4% | Step 3.5 Flash |
| Vending-Bench 2 | $202 | Not measured | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index41
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-27B | Step 3.5 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 85.8% | 83.1% | Qwen3.5-27B |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 23.9% | 24.5% | Step 3.5 Flash |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1415 | 1411 | Qwen3.5-27B |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1427 | 1421 | Qwen3.5-27B |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1429 | 1421 | Qwen3.5-27B |
| LMArena Vision: diagrams | 1249 | Not measured | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Vision: homework | 1256 | Not measured | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here | |||
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-27B | Step 3.5 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text: math | 1429 | 1408 | Qwen3.5-27B |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | 1429 | 1421 | Qwen3.5-27B |
| Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here | |||
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index31
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-27B | Step 3.5 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text: science | 1437 | 1415 | Qwen3.5-27B |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1425 | 1408 | Qwen3.5-27B |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1405 | 1408 | Step 3.5 Flash |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1399 | 1394 | Qwen3.5-27B |
| Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here | |||
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-27B | Step 3.5 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 9 boards here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index145
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-27B | Step 3.5 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBench | 75.6% | 66.5% | Qwen3.5-27B |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 77.7% | 63.0% | Qwen3.5-27B |
| DTBench | 82.4% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMCA | 34.0% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Text | 1409 | 1403 | Qwen3.5-27B |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1393 | 1385 | Qwen3.5-27B |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1362 | 1357 | Qwen3.5-27B |
| LMArena Vision | 1241 | Not measured | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Text: English | 1425 | 1417 | Qwen3.5-27B |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1390 | 1385 | Qwen3.5-27B |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1478 | 1446 | Qwen3.5-27B |
| LMArena Text: German | 1392 | 1405 | Step 3.5 Flash |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | 1346 | 1353 | Step 3.5 Flash |
| LMArena Text: Korean | 1359 | 1351 | Qwen3.5-27B |
| LMArena Text: French | 1410 | 1421 | Step 3.5 Flash |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | 1407 | 1419 | Step 3.5 Flash |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1390 | 1385 | Qwen3.5-27B |
| LMArena Text: Polish | 1375 | 1389 | Step 3.5 Flash |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1410 | 1404 | Qwen3.5-27B |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1413 | 1402 | Qwen3.5-27B |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1380 | 1372 | Qwen3.5-27B |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1363 | 1360 | Qwen3.5-27B |
| LMArena Vision: English | 1246 | Not measured | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Vision: Chinese | 1301 | Not measured | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Vision: reading text | 1246 | Not measured | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Vision: humor | 1227 | Not measured | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Vision: captioning | 1170 | Not measured | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Vision: recognizing things | 1210 | Not measured | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| LMArena Vision: creative writing | 1224 | Not measured | Only Qwen3.5-27B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-27B | Step 3.5 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
Step 3.5 Flash costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Step 3.5 Flash costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Step 3.5 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 | Qwen3.5-27B | StepFun Step 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Qwen | StepFun |
| Weights | Open weights | Open weights |
| Released | February 25, 2026 | January 29, 2026 |
| Context window | 262K | 262K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.195 | $0.10 |
| Output $/Mtok | $1.56 | $0.30 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 1 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Qwen3.5-27B better than Step 3.5 Flash for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Qwen3.5-27B for work measured by LMArena Text: coding or LMArena Text: software and IT, where it leads.
Which is cheaper, Qwen3.5-27B or Step 3.5 Flash?
Qwen3.5-27B costs $0.195 per million input tokens and $1.56 per million output tokens; Step 3.5 Flash costs $0.10 and $0.30. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Qwen3.5-27B or Step 3.5 Flash?
Neither: both take 262K tokens.
How many benchmarks is the Qwen3.5-27B vs Step 3.5 Flash comparison based on?
35 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Qwen3.5-27B's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Step 3.5 Flash's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.