Model Comparison
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B vs Qwen3.6-27BWhich is better in 2026?
Qwen3.6-27B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Qwen3.5-35B-A3B is 2.0x cheaper per token.
Verdict: Qwen3.5-35B-A3B vs Qwen3.6-27B — which is better?
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B (by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team) and Qwen3.6-27B (by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team) are two of the AI models people compare most. Here is how they stack up on benchmarks, price and capabilities, and which one to pick in 2026.
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B outperforms in 5 benchmarks (ERQA, Humanity's Last Exam, MMStar, OCRBench, SimpleVQA), while Qwen3.6-27B is better at 25 benchmarks (CC-OCR, C-Eval, CharXiv-R, DynaMath, EmbSpatialBench, GPQA, HMMT 2025, HMMT25, LiveCodeBench v6, MathVista-Mini, MLVU, MMBench-V1.1, MMLU-Pro, MMLU-Redux, MMMU, MMMU-Pro, MVBench, RefCOCO-avg, RefSpatialBench, SuperGPQA, SWE-Bench Verified, Terminal-Bench 2.0, V*, VideoMME w sub., VideoMMMU). Qwen3.6-27B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.
On price, Qwen3.5-35B-A3B is roughly 2.0x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
Choose Qwen3.5-35B-A3B if…
- cost matters — it's about 2.0x cheaper per token
Choose Qwen3.6-27B if…
- you want the strongest raw capability — it leads on 28 of 33 shared benchmarks
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Apr 2026
Performance Benchmarks
Comparative analysis across standard metrics
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B outperforms in 5 benchmarks (ERQA, Humanity's Last Exam, MMStar, OCRBench, SimpleVQA), while Qwen3.6-27B is better at 25 benchmarks (CC-OCR, C-Eval, CharXiv-R, DynaMath, EmbSpatialBench, GPQA, HMMT 2025, HMMT25, LiveCodeBench v6, MathVista-Mini, MLVU, MMBench-V1.1, MMLU-Pro, MMLU-Redux, MMMU, MMMU-Pro, MVBench, RefCOCO-avg, RefSpatialBench, SuperGPQA, SWE-Bench Verified, Terminal-Bench 2.0, V*, VideoMME w sub., VideoMMMU).
Qwen3.6-27B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.
Arena Performance
Human preference votes
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, Qwen3.5-35B-A3B ($0.25/1M tokens) is 2.4x cheaper than Qwen3.6-27B ($0.60/1M tokens).
For output processing, Qwen3.5-35B-A3B ($2.00/1M tokens) is 1.8x cheaper than Qwen3.6-27B ($3.60/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Qwen3.6-27B is more expensive than Qwen3.5-35B-A3B.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Model Size
Parameter count comparison
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B has 7.2B more parameters than Qwen3.6-27B, making it 26.0% larger.
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
Both models have the same input context window of 262,144 tokens. Qwen3.6-27B can generate longer responses up to 65,536 tokens, while Qwen3.5-35B-A3B is limited to 65,000 tokens.
Input Capabilities
Supported data types and modalities
Both Qwen3.5-35B-A3B and Qwen3.6-27B support multimodal inputs.
They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
Qwen3.6-27B
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
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B was released on 2026-02-24, while Qwen3.6-27B was released on 2026-04-21.
Qwen3.6-27B is 2 months newer than Qwen3.5-35B-A3B.
Feb 24, 2026
5 months ago
Apr 21, 2026
3 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
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B is available from Novita. Qwen3.6-27B is available from Novita.
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
Qwen3.6-27B
Outputs Comparison
Key Takeaways
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
View detailsAlibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.6-27B
View detailsAlibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Detailed Comparison
Interactive Arena
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against Qwen3.5-35B-A3B and Qwen3.6-27B side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
| Feature | | |
|---|
FAQ
Common questions about Qwen3.5-35B-A3B vs Qwen3.6-27B.