Model comparison

Qwen3.5 27B vs Wizardlm 70b

Qwen3.5 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.9 to 33.0 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Qwen3.5 27B Alibaba (Qwen)

41.9

Rank #127 Confirmed

Wizardlm 70b Microsoft

33.0

Rank #249 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen3.5 27B scores higher in 7 categories and Wizardlm 70b in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen3.5 27B leads 59.3 to 34.8.

Side by side

Qwen3.5 27B and Wizardlm 70b specifications
Qwen3.5 27BWizardlm 70b
ProviderAlibaba (Qwen)Microsoft
Noometry Index41.933.0
Released2026-02-23—
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window262K—
Max output66K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.30—
Output $ / M tokens$2.40—
Results tracked2812

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.5 27B leads

Qwen3.5 27B: 38.9 (#168), Wizardlm 70b: 31.4 (#285)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3.5 27BWizardlm 70b
LMArena Coding14271081
LMArena WebDev1358—
WeirdML39.5%—
ALE-Bench349.45—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Qwen3.5 27B: —, Wizardlm 70b: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3.5 27BWizardlm 70b
Vending-Bench 2201.98—

Reasoning Qwen3.5 27B leads

Qwen3.5 27B: 27.5 (#117), Wizardlm 70b: 20.7 (#234)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3.5 27BWizardlm 70b
LMArena Hard Prompts14141079
NYT Connections (extended)47.9%—
Thematic Generalization45.5%—
DTBench82.4%—
LMCA34%—

Math Qwen3.5 27B leads

Qwen3.5 27B: 38.8 (#127), Wizardlm 70b: 32.2 (#218)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3.5 27BWizardlm 70b
LMArena Math14291116
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions56.7%—

Knowledge Not comparable

Qwen3.5 27B: 38.0 (#150), Wizardlm 70b: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3.5 27BWizardlm 70b
Vectara Hallucination Rate12.1%—
LMArena Expert1428—

Multimodal Not comparable

Qwen3.5 27B: 39.4 (#59), Wizardlm 70b: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3.5 27BWizardlm 70b
LMArena Vision1241—

Multilingual Qwen3.5 27B leads

Qwen3.5 27B: 50.8 (#115), Wizardlm 70b: 29.6 (#265)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3.5 27BWizardlm 70b
LMArena Non-English13901078
LMArena Chinese14781052
LMArena German13931083
LMArena Russian13901155
LMArena French1410—
LMArena Japanese1345—
LMArena Korean1358—
LMArena Spanish1407—

Instruction Following Qwen3.5 27B leads

Qwen3.5 27B: 73.5 (#119), Wizardlm 70b: 56.3 (#273)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3.5 27BWizardlm 70b
LMArena Instruction Following13931093

Long Context Qwen3.5 27B leads

Qwen3.5 27B: 43.1 (#106), Wizardlm 70b: 33.3 (#263)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3.5 27BWizardlm 70b
LMArena Longer Query14131097

Writing & Preference Qwen3.5 27B leads

Qwen3.5 27B: 59.3 (#111), Wizardlm 70b: 34.8 (#269)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3.5 27BWizardlm 70b
LMArena Text14091120
LMArena Creative Writing13621149
LMArena Multi-Turn14101108

Frequently asked questions

Is Qwen3.5 27B better than Wizardlm 70b?

Qwen3.5 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.9 to 33.0 on the Noometry Index.

Is Qwen3.5 27B or Wizardlm 70b better for coding?

Qwen3.5 27B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.9 versus 31.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Qwen3.5 27B and Wizardlm 70b share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen3.5 27B has 28 scored results on Noometry and Wizardlm 70b has 12.

Related comparisons

Go deeper