# Qwen3.5 27B vs Sonar

> Qwen3.5 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.4 to 37.8 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/qwen3-5-27b-vs-sonar
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 0

## Summary

- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen3.5 27B leads 59.5 to 52.6.
- Qwen3.5 27B is cheaper at $0.30 / $2.40 per million input/output tokens, against $1 / $1 for Sonar.
- Qwen3.5 27B accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 128K.
- Qwen3.5 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Qwen3.5 27B | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Perplexity |
| Noometry Index | 41.4 | 37.8 |
| Rank | 127 | 184 |
| Context | 262K | 128K |
| Input $/M | $0.30 | $1 |
| Output $/M | $2.40 | $1 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Qwen3.5 27B: 38.6 (#159)
- Sonar: 35.1 (#217)

| Benchmark | Qwen3.5 27B | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1357 | — |
| WeirdML | 39.5% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 35.1% |
| LMArena Coding | 1427 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 349.45 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Qwen3.5 27B: —
- Sonar: —

| Benchmark | Qwen3.5 27B | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| Vending-Bench 2 | 201.98 | — |

## Reasoning

- Qwen3.5 27B: 26.6 (#116)
- Sonar: 20.3 (#221)

| Benchmark | Qwen3.5 27B | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 47.9% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 45.5% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 46.3% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1414 | — |
| DTBench | 82.4% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 37.9% |
| LMCA | 34% | — |
| LiveBench | — | 46.9% |

## Math

- Qwen3.5 27B: 36.8 (#103)
- Sonar: 31.3 (#197)

| Benchmark | Qwen3.5 27B | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 56.7% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 41.6% |
| LMArena Math | 1428 | — |

## Knowledge

- Qwen3.5 27B: 37.4 (#149)
- Sonar: —

| Benchmark | Qwen3.5 27B | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 12.1% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1428 | — |

## Multimodal

- Qwen3.5 27B: 38.7 (#56)
- Sonar: —

| Benchmark | Qwen3.5 27B | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1240 | — |

## Multilingual

- Qwen3.5 27B: 51.0 (#112)
- Sonar: —

| Benchmark | Qwen3.5 27B | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1390 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1478 | — |
| LMArena French | 1409 | — |
| LMArena German | 1393 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1345 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1359 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1389 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1408 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Qwen3.5 27B: 73.7 (#114)
- Sonar: 71.5 (#146)

| Benchmark | Qwen3.5 27B | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 76.2% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1393 | — |

## Long Context

- Qwen3.5 27B: 43.1 (#103)
- Sonar: —

| Benchmark | Qwen3.5 27B | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1413 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Qwen3.5 27B: 59.5 (#106)
- Sonar: 52.6 (#166)

| Benchmark | Qwen3.5 27B | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1409 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1362 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1410 | — |
| LiveBench Language | — | 44.1% |

## FAQ

### Is Qwen3.5 27B better than Sonar?

Qwen3.5 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.4 to 37.8 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, Qwen3.5 27B or Sonar?

Qwen3.5 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $2.40 per million output tokens; Sonar lists at $1 and $1.

### Is Qwen3.5 27B or Sonar better for coding?

Qwen3.5 27B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.6 versus 35.1 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.5 27B does, with 262K tokens against 128K.

### How many benchmarks do Qwen3.5 27B and Sonar share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen3.5 27B has 28 scored results on Noometry and Sonar has 7.