Side-by-side benchmark comparison across agentic, coding, multimodal, knowledge, reasoning, and math workflows.
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
71
Winner · 3/8 categoriesSarvam 105B
60
1/8 categoriesQwen3.5-122B-A10B· Sarvam 105B
Pick Qwen3.5-122B-A10B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Sarvam 105B only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority.
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B is clearly ahead on the aggregate, 71 to 60. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 76.3 against 45. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Verified, 72% to 45%. Sarvam 105B does hit back in knowledge, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B gives you the larger context window at 262K, compared with 128K for Sarvam 105B.
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 | Qwen3.5-122B-A10B | Sarvam 105B |
|---|---|---|
| AgenticQwen3.5-122B-A10B wins | ||
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | 49.4% | — |
| BrowseComp | 63.8% | 49.5% |
| OSWorld-Verified | 58% | — |
| Tau2-Telecom | 79.5% | — |
| Claw-Eval | 47.1% | — |
| CodingQwen3.5-122B-A10B wins | ||
| SWE-bench Verified | 72% | 45% |
| LiveCodeBench | 78.9% | — |
| LiveCodeBench v6 | — | 71.7% |
| Multimodal & Grounded | ||
| MMMU-Pro | 76.9% | — |
| Reasoning | ||
| LongBench v2 | 60.2% | — |
| gpqaDiamond | — | 78.7% |
| hle | — | 11.2% |
| KnowledgeSarvam 105B wins | ||
| MMLU-Pro | 86.7% | 81.7% |
| SuperGPQA | 67.1% | — |
| GPQA | 86.6% | — |
| MMLU | — | 90.6% |
| Instruction FollowingQwen3.5-122B-A10B wins | ||
| IFEval | 93.4% | 84.8% |
| Multilingual | ||
| MMLU-ProX | 82.2% | — |
| Mathematics | ||
| MATH-500 | — | 98.6% |
| AIME 2025 | — | 88.3% |
| HMMT Feb 2025 | — | 85.8% |
| HMMT Nov 2025 | — | 85.8% |
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B is ahead overall, 71 to 60. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 72% and 45%.
Sarvam 105B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 81.7 versus 81.6. Inside this category, MMLU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 76.3 versus 45. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 56 versus 49.5. Inside this category, BrowseComp is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 93.4 versus 84.8. Inside this category, IFEval is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
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.