Qwen3.5-9B vs Reka Flash 3
Qwen3.5-9B leads Reka Flash 3 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 13.3 to 6.4, and Qwen3.5-9B costs 1.3x less per output token ($0.15 vs $0.20 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 7 benchmarks have a result for both.
Qwen3.5-9B or Reka Flash 3: which to pick
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Qwen3.5-9B for output tokens 1.3x cheaper ($0.15 vs $0.20 per million) and a larger context window (262K against 66K tokens).
- Shared results
- 7
- Qwen3.5-9B only
- 9
- Reka Flash 3 only
- 5
- 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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Qwen3.5-9B
Qwen3.5-9B leads, 13.3 against 6.4.
Same board, both measured
Long documents
Listed context window
Qwen3.5-9B
Qwen3.5-9B takes 262K tokens against 66K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen3.5-9B
Qwen3.5-9B $0.0002, Reka Flash 3 $0.0002 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Qwen3.5-9B not benchmarked, Reka Flash 3 not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- Agentic work, 86.8 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- τ²-Bench Telecom: Qwen3.5-9B 86.8% against Reka Flash 3 0.0%, 86.8 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Qwen3.5-9B $0.15 against Reka Flash 3 $0.20 per million output tokens, 1.3x apart.
- Context window
- Qwen3.5-9B takes 262K tokens, Reka Flash 3 66K.
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 | Qwen3.5-9B | Bars | Reka Flash 3 | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 1 | 0 | ||
| Intelligence | 1 | 0 | ||
| Agentic work | 1 | 0 | ||
| Reasoning | 2 | 0 | ||
| General | 2 | 0 | ||
| All shared boards | 7 | 0 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index10
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-9B | Reka Flash 3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Coding Index | 23.5 | Not measured | Only Qwen3.5-9B measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 43.5% | Only Reka Flash 3 measured |
| SciCode | 29.5% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.5-9B measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 24.2% | 0.0% | Qwen3.5-9B |
| Terminal-Bench | 9.2% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.5-9B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-9B | Reka Flash 3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 13.3 | 6.4 | Qwen3.5-9B |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 139.3 | Not measured | Only Qwen3.5-9B measured |
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-9B | Reka Flash 3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 86.8% | 0.0% | Qwen3.5-9B |
| BALROG | Not measured | 29.2% | Only Reka Flash 3 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 40 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-9B | Reka Flash 3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 80.6% | 52.9% | Qwen3.5-9B |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 14.9% | 4.4% | Qwen3.5-9B |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 79.0% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.5-9B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 20 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-9B | Reka Flash 3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Math Index | Not measured | 33.7 | Only Reka Flash 3 measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 33.7% | Only Reka Flash 3 measured |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 61.7% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.5-9B measured |
| MathArena | 13.0% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.5-9B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-9B | Reka Flash 3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 66.9% | Only Reka Flash 3 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 19 boards here | |||
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-9B | Reka Flash 3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 9 boards here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-9B | Reka Flash 3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBench | 66.7% | 30.4% | Qwen3.5-9B |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 70.0% | 0.0% | Qwen3.5-9B |
| DTBench | 71.2% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.5-9B measured |
| LMCA | 24.5% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.5-9B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 44 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-9B | Reka Flash 3 | 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
Qwen3.5-9B costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Qwen3.5-9B costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Qwen3.5-9B 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 | Qwen3.5-9B | Reka Flash 3 |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Qwen | Reka |
| Weights | Open weights | Open weights |
| Released | March 10, 2026 | March 12, 2025 |
| Context window | 262K | 66K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.10 | $0.10 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.15 | $0.20 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Qwen3.5-9B better than Reka Flash 3 for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Qwen3.5-9B for output tokens 1.3x cheaper ($0.15 vs $0.20 per million) and a larger context window (262K against 66K tokens).
Which is cheaper, Qwen3.5-9B or Reka Flash 3?
Qwen3.5-9B costs $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; Reka Flash 3 costs $0.10 and $0.20. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Qwen3.5-9B or Reka Flash 3?
Qwen3.5-9B, with 262K tokens against 66K.
How many benchmarks is the Qwen3.5-9B vs Reka Flash 3 comparison based on?
7 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Qwen3.5-9B's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Reka Flash 3's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.