Model comparison
Qwen3.5-9B vs Qwen3.6 Flash
Qwen3.6 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 33.8 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.5-9B costs 3.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.6 Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 6 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 6 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen3.5-9B scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.6 Flash in 2 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.6 Flash leads 29.0 to 23.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 61.7% for Qwen3.5-9B and 84.4% for Qwen3.6 Flash.
- Qwen3.5-9B is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.15 per million input/output tokens, against $0.19 / $1.13 for Qwen3.6 Flash.
- Qwen3.6 Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 262K.
- Qwen3.5-9B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Qwen3.5-9B | Qwen3.6 Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 33.8 | 38.8 |
| Released | 2026-02-23 | 2026-04-27 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 262K | 1M |
| Max output | 66K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.10 | $0.19 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.15 | $1.13 |
| Results tracked | 10 | 13 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Qwen3.5-9B: 35.9 (#217), Qwen3.6 Flash: —
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Qwen3.5-9B: 14.5 (#151), Qwen3.6 Flash: —
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-9B | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 9.2% | — |
Reasoning Qwen3.6 Flash leads
Qwen3.5-9B: 23.1 (#182), Qwen3.6 Flash: 29.0 (#96)
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-9B | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 12% | 20% |
| DTBench | 71.2% | 77.1% |
| LMCA | 24.5% | 31% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 139.46 | 143.26 |
| SimpleBench | — | 35.2% |
| CritPt | 0.3% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 18% |
Math Qwen3.6 Flash leads
Qwen3.5-9B: 34.8 (#192), Qwen3.6 Flash: 39.0 (#117)
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-9B | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 61.7% | 84.4% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 22.5% |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 48.5% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 10.3% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 0% |
Knowledge Qwen3.5-9B leads
Qwen3.5-9B: 46.0 (#84), Qwen3.6 Flash: 42.1 (#100)
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-9B | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 79% | 83.3% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 15.9% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Qwen3.5-9B better than Qwen3.6 Flash?
Qwen3.6 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 33.8 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.5-9B costs 3.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.6 Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Qwen3.5-9B or Qwen3.6 Flash?
Qwen3.5-9B is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 Flash lists at $0.19 and $1.13.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3.6 Flash does, with 1M tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks do Qwen3.5-9B and Qwen3.6 Flash share?
6 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen3.5-9B has 10 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Flash has 13.