Model comparison
DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) vs Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
Head-to-head evidence from 16 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) #92 (Estimated); Qwen3.5-35B-A3B #72 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) and Qwen3.5-35B-A3B share 16 comparable benchmark results. 3 of 8 categories are comparable. 22 results are unique to DeepSeek V4 Flash (High); 12 to Qwen3.5-35B-A3B.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 16
- DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) only
- 22
- Qwen3.5-35B-A3B only
- 12
- Comparable categories
- 3 / 8
Pick Qwen3.5-35B-A3B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority or you need the larger 1M context window.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 16 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 3 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 56.97 to 53.95. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B's sharpest advantage is in knowledge, where it averages 81.6 against 52.1. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 56.6% to 40.5%. DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) does hit back in coding, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.14 input / $0.28 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Qwen3.5-35B-A3B. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 262K for Qwen3.5-35B-A3B.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) | Δ | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)52.1 | Margin→ 29.5 | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B81.6 |
| Coding | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)68.5 | Margin← 7.9 | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B60.6 |
| Agentic | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)55.3 | Margin← 4.3 | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B51.0 |
| Reasoning | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B59.0 |
| Math | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)91.9 | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.5-35B-A3BNot measured |
| Multilingual | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B81.0 |
| Inst. Following | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B91.9 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 56.6%B 40.5%Winner: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Δ 16.1Terminal-Bench 2.0: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) scored 56.6%; Qwen3.5-35B-A3B scored 40.5%. DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 78.6%B 69.2%Winner: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Δ 9.4SWE-bench Verified: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) scored 78.6%; Qwen3.5-35B-A3B scored 69.2%. DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
BrowseComp
AgenticA 53.5%B 61%Winner: Qwen3.5-35B-A3BΔ 7.5BrowseComp: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) scored 53.5%; Qwen3.5-35B-A3B scored 61%. Qwen3.5-35B-A3B wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
GPQA
KnowledgeA 87.4%B 84.2%Winner: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Δ 3.2GPQA: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) scored 87.4%; Qwen3.5-35B-A3B scored 84.2%. DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
MMLU-Pro
KnowledgeA 86.4%B 85.3%Winner: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Δ 1.1MMLU-Pro: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) scored 86.4%; Qwen3.5-35B-A3B scored 85.3%. DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)$0.14 input / $0.28 output | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B$0 input / $0 output | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Not available | Qwen3.5-35B-A3BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Not available | Qwen3.5-35B-A3BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)1M | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B262K | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticDeepSeek V4 Flash (High) wins11 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 56.6% | 40.5% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads |
| BrowseCompSource | 53.5% | 61% | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B leads |
| HLE w/ toolsSource | 40.3% | — | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | 67.4% | — | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | 43.5% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 95.6% | 89.2% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 28.2% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 32.4% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 1147 | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | — | 54.5% | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | — | 28.96% | Not comparable |
CodingDeepSeek V4 Flash (High) wins8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| CodeforcesSource | 2816.0 | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 78.6% | 69.2% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 52.3% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE MultilingualSource | 70.2% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 56.6% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 42.0% | 37.7% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 52.0% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-RebenchSource | — | 53.7% | Not comparable |
Reasoning5 benchmarks
KnowledgeQwen3.5-35B-A3B wins13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProSource | 86.4% | 85.3% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads |
| SimpleQASource | 28.9% | — | Not comparable |
| Chinese-SimpleQASource | 73.2% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | 87.4% | 84.2% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads |
| GPQA-DSource | 87.4% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 29.4% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 37.5% | 29.3% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 86.7% | 84.5% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads |
| AA-HLESource | 27.8% | 19.7% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -22.3% | -46.4% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 35.5% | 20.5% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 89.7% | 84.0% | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B leads |
| SuperGPQASource | — | 63.4% | Not comparable |
Math4 benchmarks
Multilingual1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProXSource | — | 81% | Not comparable |
Multimodal6 benchmarks
Frequently Asked Questions (4)
Which is better, DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) or Qwen3.5-35B-A3B?
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 56.97 to 53.95. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 56.6% and 40.5%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) or Qwen3.5-35B-A3B?
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 81.6 versus 52.1. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) or Qwen3.5-35B-A3B?
DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 68.5 versus 60.6. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) or Qwen3.5-35B-A3B?
DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 55.3 versus 51. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.