Qwen3.5-27B vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
Qwen3.5-27B and Qwen3.6-35B-A3B are closely matched at 34.0 and 32.5 on the LLM Stats Score. Qwen3.6-35B-A3B is 2.5x cheaper per token.
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
Qwen3.5-27B and Qwen3.6-35B-A3B are closely matched on the overall LLM Stats Score at 34.0 and 32.5.
In the 36 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Qwen3.5-27B wins 20; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.
On price, Qwen3.6-35B-A3B is roughly 2.5x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.
Choose Qwen3.5-27B
- you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 20 of 36 exact shared results
Choose Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- cost matters — it's about 2.5x cheaper per token
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Apr 2026
At a glance
The differences that matter most.
Capability indexes
Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks
Individual benchmarks
81 reported for Qwen3.5-27B · 49 for Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
Qwen3.5-27B outperforms in 20 benchmarks (AI2D, C-Eval, CharXiv-R, EmbSpatialBench, Hallusion Bench, HMMT 2025, HMMT25, Humanity's Last Exam, LiveCodeBench v6, LVBench, MathVista-Mini, MMLU-Pro, MMMU, RefSpatialBench, SuperGPQA, VideoMME w/o sub., VideoMME w sub., VITA-Bench, WideSearch, ZEROBench-Sub), while Qwen3.6-35B-A3B is better at 15 benchmarks (CC-OCR, DeepPlanning, GPQA, MLVU, MMBench-V1.1, MMLU-Redux, MMMU-Pro, ODinW, OmniDocBench 1.5, RealWorldQA, RefCOCO-avg, SimpleVQA, SWE-Bench Verified, Terminal-Bench 2.0, VideoMMMU).
Qwen3.5-27B has a slight edge in benchmark performance.
Human preference
Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, Qwen3.5-27B ($0.26/1M tokens) is 2.6x more expensive than Qwen3.6-35B-A3B ($0.10/1M tokens).
For output processing, Qwen3.5-27B ($2.40/1M tokens) is 2.5x more expensive than Qwen3.6-35B-A3B ($0.95/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Qwen3.5-27B is more expensive than Qwen3.6-35B-A3B.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Model Size
Parameter count comparison
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B has 8.0B more parameters than Qwen3.5-27B, making it 29.6% larger.
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
Both models have the same input context window of 262,144 tokens. Both models can generate responses up to 262,144 tokens.
Input capabilities
Documented input modalities across available providers
Both Qwen3.5-27B and Qwen3.6-35B-A3B support multimodal inputs.
They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.
Qwen3.5-27B
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
License
Usage and distribution terms
Both models are licensed under Apache 2.0.
Both models share the same licensing terms, providing consistent usage rights.
Apache 2.0
Open weights
Apache 2.0
Open weights
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
Qwen3.5-27B was released on 2026-02-24, while Qwen3.6-35B-A3B was released on 2026-04-16.
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B is 2 months newer than Qwen3.5-27B.
Feb 24, 2026
6 months ago
Apr 16, 2026
4 months ago
1mo newerKnowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.
Unable to compare the recency of their training data.
Provider Availability
Qwen3.5-27B is available from DeepInfra, Novita. Qwen3.6-35B-A3B is available from DeepInfra.
Qwen3.5-27B
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against Qwen3.5-27B and Qwen3.6-35B-A3B side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about Qwen3.5-27B vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B.