Side-by-side benchmark comparison across agentic, coding, multimodal, knowledge, reasoning, and math workflows.
Granite-4.0-H-1B
~43
0/8 categoriesQwen3.5-27B
71
Winner · 3/8 categoriesGranite-4.0-H-1B· Qwen3.5-27B
Pick Qwen3.5-27B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Granite-4.0-H-1B only becomes the better choice if you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Qwen3.5-27B is clearly ahead on the aggregate, 71 to 43. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Qwen3.5-27B's sharpest advantage is in knowledge, where it averages 80.6 against 32.6. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is GPQA, 29.9% to 85.5%.
Qwen3.5-27B is the reasoning model in the pair, while Granite-4.0-H-1B is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Qwen3.5-27B gives you the larger context window at 262K, compared with 128K for Granite-4.0-H-1B.
BenchLM keeps the benchmark table and the operator tradeoffs on the same page so a better score does not hide a materially slower, pricier, or smaller-context model.
Runtime metrics show N/A when BenchLM does not have a sourced snapshot for that exact model. The scoring rules and freshness policy are documented on the methodology page.
| Benchmark | Granite-4.0-H-1B | Qwen3.5-27B |
|---|---|---|
| Agentic | ||
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | — | 41.6% |
| BrowseComp | — | 61% |
| OSWorld-Verified | — | 56.2% |
| tau2-bench | — | 79% |
| Coding | ||
| HumanEval | 74% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 72.4% |
| LiveCodeBench | — | 80.7% |
| Multimodal & Grounded | ||
| MMMU-Pro | — | 75% |
| Reasoning | ||
| BBH | 60.4% | — |
| LongBench v2 | — | 60.6% |
| KnowledgeQwen3.5-27B wins | ||
| MMLU | 59.4% | — |
| GPQA | 29.9% | 85.5% |
| MMLU-Pro | 34.0% | 86.1% |
| SuperGPQA | — | 65.6% |
| Instruction FollowingQwen3.5-27B wins | ||
| IFEval | 77.4% | 95% |
| MultilingualQwen3.5-27B wins | ||
| MGSM | 37.8% | — |
| MMLU-ProX | — | 82.2% |
| Mathematics | ||
| Coming soon | ||
Qwen3.5-27B is ahead overall, 71 to 43. The biggest single separator in this matchup is GPQA, where the scores are 29.9% and 85.5%.
Qwen3.5-27B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 80.6 versus 32.6. Inside this category, GPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Qwen3.5-27B has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 95 versus 77.4. Inside this category, IFEval is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Qwen3.5-27B has the edge for multilingual tasks in this comparison, averaging 82.2 versus 37.8. Granite-4.0-H-1B stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Get notified when new models drop, benchmark scores change, or the leaderboard shifts. One email per week.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime. We only store derived location metadata for consent routing.