Noometry

Model comparison

Qwen3.5-Flash vs Qwen3 8B

Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.3 to 33.3 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 7 shared benchmarks.

Qwen3.5-Flash Alibaba (Qwen)

42.3

Rank #105 Confirmed

Qwen3 8B Alibaba (Qwen)

33.3

Rank #237 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 7 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen3.5-Flash scores higher in 5 categories and Qwen3 8B in 0 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.5-Flash leads 32.9 to 16.1.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 84.4% for Qwen3.5-Flash and 56.1% for Qwen3 8B.
  • Qwen3.5-Flash is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $0.18 / $0.70 for Qwen3 8B.
  • Qwen3.5-Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 131K.
  • Qwen3 8B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Qwen3.5-FlashQwen3 8B
ProviderAlibaba (Qwen)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index42.333.3
Released2026-02-232025-04
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M131K
Max output66K8K
Input $ / M tokens$0.10$0.18
Output $ / M tokens$0.40$0.70
Results tracked3211

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

Category by category

Coding Too close to call

Qwen3.5-Flash: 33.9 (#234), Qwen3 8B: 33.4 (#245)

BenchmarkQwen3.5-FlashQwen3 8B
LMArena WebDev1243—
SciCode—22.6%
LMArena Coding1412—
ALE-Bench221.8—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Qwen3.5-Flash: —, Qwen3 8B: 29.9 (#71)

BenchmarkQwen3.5-FlashQwen3 8B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—42.6%
Vending-Bench 2462.69—

Reasoning Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Qwen3.5-Flash: 32.9 (#63), Qwen3 8B: 16.1 (#299)

BenchmarkQwen3.5-FlashQwen3 8B
Chess Puzzles21%5%
DTBench82.9%59.7%
LMCA29.1%8.8%
Epoch Capabilities Index143.98136.17
CritPt—0%
LMArena Hard Prompts1404—
Mystery Game Puzzles20%—

Math Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Qwen3.5-Flash: 36.3 (#117), Qwen3 8B: 33.3 (#176)

BenchmarkQwen3.5-FlashQwen3 8B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202584.4%56.1%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)18.2%—
LMArena Math1407—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)6.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)0%—

Knowledge Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Qwen3.5-Flash: 43.2 (#84), Qwen3 8B: 36.1 (#164)

BenchmarkQwen3.5-FlashQwen3 8B
GPQA Diamond82.3%56.8%
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.5%4.8%
SimpleQA Verified20.3%—
LMArena Expert1408—

Multilingual Not comparable

Qwen3.5-Flash: 50.7 (#116), Qwen3 8B: —

BenchmarkQwen3.5-FlashQwen3 8B
LMArena Non-English1385—
LMArena Chinese1446—
LMArena French1412—
LMArena German1389—
LMArena Japanese1369—
LMArena Korean1344—
LMArena Russian1379—
LMArena Spanish1399—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Qwen3.5-Flash: 72.8 (#133), Qwen3 8B: —

BenchmarkQwen3.5-FlashQwen3 8B
LMArena Instruction Following1374—

Long Context Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Qwen3.5-Flash: 42.4 (#119), Qwen3 8B: 37.8 (#205)

BenchmarkQwen3.5-FlashQwen3 8B
Fiction.LiveBench—62.1%
LMArena Longer Query1392—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Qwen3.5-Flash: 58.2 (#117), Qwen3 8B: —

BenchmarkQwen3.5-FlashQwen3 8B
LMArena Text1397—
LMArena Creative Writing1343—
LMArena Multi-Turn1393—

Frequently asked questions

Is Qwen3.5-Flash better than Qwen3 8B?

Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.3 to 33.3 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3.5-Flash or Qwen3 8B?

Qwen3.5-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Qwen3 8B lists at $0.18 and $0.70.

Is Qwen3.5-Flash or Qwen3 8B better for coding?

They score almost the same on coding (33.9 vs 33.4); test both on your own repository before choosing.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.5-Flash does, with 1M tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do Qwen3.5-Flash and Qwen3 8B share?

7 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen3.5-Flash has 32 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 8B has 11.

Related comparisons

Go deeper