Skip to main content

Model comparison

Mistral Medium 3.5 128B vs Qwen3.5-27B

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 14 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

No comparison
59.68/100
1 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Mistral Medium 3.5 128B unranked (Not scored); Qwen3.5-27B #51 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Mistral Medium 3.5 128B and Qwen3.5-27B share 14 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 11 results are unique to Mistral Medium 3.5 128B; 14 to Qwen3.5-27B.

Updated July 27, 2026
Shared results
14
Mistral Medium 3.5 128B only
11
Qwen3.5-27B only
14
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Treat this as a split decision. Mistral Medium 3.5 128B makes more sense if coding is the priority; Qwen3.5-27B is the better fit if you want the cheaper token bill or you need the larger 262K context window.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 14 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

Mistral Medium 3.5 128B and Qwen3.5-27B finish on the same BenchAlign overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The BenchAlign headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.

Mistral Medium 3.5 128B is also the more expensive model on tokens at $1.50 input / $7.50 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Qwen3.5-27B. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. Qwen3.5-27B gives you the larger context window at 262K, compared with 256K for Mistral Medium 3.5 128B.

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 scores and score margins for Mistral Medium 3.5 128B and Qwen3.5-27B
CategoryMistral Medium 3.5 128BΔQwen3.5-27B
CodingMistral Medium 3.5 128B77.6Margin 12.7Qwen3.5-27B64.9
AgenticMistral Medium 3.5 128BNot measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.5-27B52.0
ReasoningMistral Medium 3.5 128BNot measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.5-27B60.6
KnowledgeMistral Medium 3.5 128BNot measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.5-27B82.7
MultilingualMistral Medium 3.5 128BNot measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.5-27B82.2
Inst. FollowingMistral Medium 3.5 128BNot measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.5-27B95.0

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · Mistral Medium 3.5 128BB · Qwen3.5-27B
  1. SWE-bench Verified

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 77.6%B 72.4%
    Winner: Mistral Medium 3.5 128BΔ 5.2
    SWE-bench Verified: Mistral Medium 3.5 128B scored 77.6%; Qwen3.5-27B scored 72.4%. Mistral Medium 3.5 128B wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricMistral Medium 3.5 128BQwen3.5-27BComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensMistral Medium 3.5 128B$1.5 input / $7.5 outputQwen3.5-27B$0 input / $0 outputQwen3.5-27B has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondMistral Medium 3.5 128BNot availableQwen3.5-27BNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenMistral Medium 3.5 128BNot availableQwen3.5-27BNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensMistral Medium 3.5 128B256KQwen3.5-27B262KQwen3.5-27B lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkMistral Medium 3.5 128BQwen3.5-27BResult
τ³-bench resultsSource 91.4%Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 19.0%Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 94.2%93.9%Mistral Medium 3.5 128B leads
GDPval-AASource 21.6%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 933Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 39.10%39.41%Qwen3.5-27B leads
AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource 33.7%Not comparable
AA Harvey LABSource 69.1%Not comparable
terminalBenchHardSource 33.3%Not comparable
AA BriefcaseSource 516Not comparable
AA Tau3 BankingSource 14.4%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 41.6%Not comparable
BrowseCompSource 61%Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 56.2%Not comparable
CodingMistral Medium 3.5 128B wins
BenchmarkMistral Medium 3.5 128BQwen3.5-27BResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 77.6%72.4%Mistral Medium 3.5 128B leads
AA Coding IndexSource 46.9%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 39.6%39.5%Mistral Medium 3.5 128B leads
SWE-RebenchSource 58.9%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkMistral Medium 3.5 128BQwen3.5-27BResult
AA-LCRSource 61.0%67.3%Qwen3.5-27B leads
CritPtSource 0.0%0.9%Qwen3.5-27B leads
LongBench v2Source 60.6%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkMistral Medium 3.5 128BQwen3.5-27BResult
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 29.9%33.8%Qwen3.5-27B leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 74.8%85.8%Qwen3.5-27B leads
AA-HLESource 12.8%22.2%Qwen3.5-27B leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -36.3%-42.0%Mistral Medium 3.5 128B leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 25.1%21.0%Mistral Medium 3.5 128B leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 82.0%79.7%Qwen3.5-27B leads
AA Openness IndexSource 33.3%Not comparable
MMLU-ProSource 86.1%Not comparable
SuperGPQASource 65.6%Not comparable
GPQASource 85.5%Not comparable
Multilingual
BenchmarkMistral Medium 3.5 128BQwen3.5-27BResult
MMLU-ProXSource 82.2%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkMistral Medium 3.5 128BQwen3.5-27BResult
AA-MMMU-ProSource 64.9%75.0%Qwen3.5-27B leads
MMMUSource 82.3%Not comparable
MMVUSource 73.3%Not comparable
MathVisionSource 86.0%Not comparable
V*Source 93.7%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkMistral Medium 3.5 128BQwen3.5-27BResult
AA-IFBenchSource 68.8%75.6%Qwen3.5-27B leads
IFEvalSource 95%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, Mistral Medium 3.5 128B or Qwen3.5-27B?

Mistral Medium 3.5 128B and Qwen3.5-27B are tied on the BenchAlign overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.

Which is better for coding, Mistral Medium 3.5 128B or Qwen3.5-27B?

Mistral Medium 3.5 128B has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 77.6 versus 64.9. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 27, 2026

Know when it’s worth switching models

The model to choose, the cheaper alternative, and the release we would wait on.

One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.