Data as of November 12, 2026 · How the score is built
Qwen3.5-27B
Decision readingQwen3.5-27B scores 47.9 out of 100 and ranks #108 of 215. This profile shows 21 source-displayable benchmark rows; its strongest eligible category is Multilingual at #10. Published weights can be self-hosted, but infrastructure cost varies and is not a comparable API token rate.
Email me when its price, rank or availability changes.
Capability
47.9/100
field median 49.4#108 of 215 ranked models
Public
#108of 215
Verified —
Price
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
input median $0.60No comparable first-party hosted token rate
Speed
78tok/s
field median 92 tok/sFirst token 31.49 s
Context
262Ktokens
field median 256,000Reported for this model; direct source link not stored
Voice benchmark evidence
EVA-Bench is an owner-defined voice evaluation. Its result stays separate from BenchLM's weighted text-model ranking.
Decision snapshot
Each value carries a field reference instead of floating alone. Markers compare this model with the current ranked and priced catalog; they are not absolute quality thresholds.
Strongest published evidence
Multilingual ranks #10. A well-rounded choice across a range of tasks.
Validate before choosing
21 published rows leave some tracked benchmark slots empty. No comparable first-party API token rate is published.
Source-linked · 21 displayable benchmark rows
Is Qwen3.5-27B right for your job?
Its place on the LLM Selector’s job rankings, the same order the job pages publish. Describe your own job to see where it stands for that.
Where Qwen3.5-27B ranks by benchmark score:
We keep what you type here, drafts included, for 180 days, and after that only the job and requirements read from it. Nothing is tied to your IP address or account. Leave out names and other personal details. Privacy
Category score record
Scores and ranks appear only where published evidence can be displayed. The table keeps the score, weight, cohort, and evidence state together.
| Category | Score | Rank | Percentile | Weight | Benchmarks | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AgenticRank #85 of 135Percentile 37thWeight 22%4 benchmarksVerified | 36.8 | 4 benchmarks | Verified | |||
| CodingRank #100 of 162Percentile 39thWeight 20%4 benchmarksVerified | 33.1 | 4 benchmarks | Verified | |||
| ReasoningRank #81 of 160Percentile 50thWeight 17%1 benchmarkVerified | 39.3 | 1 benchmark | Verified | |||
| MultimodalRank #58 of 67Percentile 14thWeight 12%6 benchmarksMixed sources | 50.5 | 6 benchmarks | Mixed sources | |||
| KnowledgeRank #96 of 180Percentile 47thWeight 12%3 benchmarksVerified | 45.1 | 3 benchmarks | Verified | |||
| MultilingualRank #10 of 17Percentile 44thWeight 7%1 benchmarkVerified | 87.1 | 1 benchmark | Verified | |||
| Inst. FollowingRank #15 of 157Percentile 91stWeight 5%1 benchmarkVerified | 92.9 | 1 benchmark | Verified | |||
| MathWeight 5%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
21 of 906 tracked benchmark slots have displayable evidence · bars run 0–100
Coverage detailsHow much of this is verified
Coverage is split by category so a strong number never hides a thin evidence base. Verified means the row is tied to a published source; provisional rows remain visible but separate.
- Agentic4/4 verified
- Coding4/4 verified
- Reasoning1/1 verified
- Multimodal4/6 verified
- Knowledge3/3 verified
- Multilingual1/1 verified
- Inst. Following1/1 verified
- MathNot measured
Capability shape
Each axis shows percentile within that category’s eligible cohort. The comparison outline is the median of the six nearest public-score peers; a collapsed vertex means the category is not rank-eligible.
Qwen3.5-27B category percentile values
- Agentic37th percentile
- Coding39th percentile
- Reasoning50th percentile
- Multimodal14th percentile
- Knowledge47th percentile
- Multilingual44th percentile
- Instruction following91st percentile
- MathNot eligible
The dashed outline is median of 6 nearest peers.
Eligible category ranks
- Agentic#85/135
- Coding#100/162
- Reasoning#81/160
- Multimodal#58/67
- Knowledge#96/180
- Multilingual#10/17
- Inst. Following#15/157
- MathNot ranked
Benchmark ledger
Every result says who ran the test. For this model, Alibaba ran 16 of 21. Coding opens by default. The tick marks the best source-verified result in the catalog; provisional leaders do not set the reference.
Coding4 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Who ran it | Use in ranking |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-Rebench | 58.9% | Best verified: Claude Opus 4.6 · 65.3% | Gap6.4 behind | Run by SWE-Rebench | Counts5% ref. weight |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSoftware Engineering Benchmark Verified | 72.4% | Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 96% | Gap23.6 behind | Reported by Alibaba | Shown only |
| LiveCodeBench v6 | 80.7% | Best verified: Sakana Fugu-Ultra · 93.2% | Gap12.5 behind | Reported by Alibaba | Shown only |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | 41.6% | Best verified: GPT-5.5 · 82.0% | Gap40.4 behind | Reported by Alibaba | Shown only |
Agentic4 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Who ran it | Use in ranking |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BrowseComp | 61% | Best verified: Atria Dawn Preview · 92.5% | Gap31.5 behind | Reported by Alibaba | Counts9% ref. weight |
| OSWorld-Verified | 56.2% | Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 86.1% | Gap29.9 behind | Reported by Alibaba | Counts8% ref. weight |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | 41.6% | Best verified: GPT-5.5 · 82% | Gap40.4 behind | Reported by Alibaba | Shown only |
| Gert LabsGert Labs Composite Game Benchmark | 39.41% | Best verified: Claude Opus 4.8 · 72.97% | Gap33.6 behind | Run by Gert Labs | Shown only |
Reasoning1 row
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Who ran it | Use in ranking |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LongBench v2 | 60.6% | Best verified: Inkling 2 Small · 70.6% | Gap10 behind | Reported by Alibaba | Counts5% ref. weight |
Multimodal6 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Who ran it | Use in ranking |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MMMU-ProMassive Multi-discipline Multimodal Understanding Pro | 75% | Best verified: GPT-6.1 Terra · 85.5% | Gap10.5 behind | Reported by Alibaba | Counts30% ref. weight |
| CharXivCharXiv Reasoning | 79.5% | Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 93.5% | Gap14 behind | Reported by Alibaba | Counts17% ref. weight |
| MMMUMassive Multi-discipline Multimodal Understanding | 82.3% | Best verified: Qwen3.5 397B · 85.0% | Gap2.7 behind | Carried from an upstream page | Shown only |
| MMVUMultimodal Multi-disciplinary Video Understanding | 73.3% | Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 82.4% | Gap9.1 behind | Carried from an upstream page | Shown only |
| MathVision | 86.0% | Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 95.2% | Gap9.2 behind | Reported by Alibaba | Shown only |
| V* | 93.7% | Best verified: Kimi K2.6 · 96.9% | Gap3.2 behind | Reported by Alibaba | Shown only |
Knowledge3 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Who ran it | Use in ranking |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProMassive Multitask Language Understanding Professional | 86.1% | Best verified: Qwen3.7 Max · 89.6% | Gap3.5 behind | Reported by Alibaba | Counts6% ref. weight |
| GPQAGraduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A | 85.5% | Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 96% | Gap10.5 behind | Reported by Alibaba | Counts3% ref. weight |
| SuperGPQASuperGPQA: Scaling LLM Evaluation Across 285 Graduate Disciplines | 65.6% | Best verified: Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) · 73.9% | Gap8.3 behind | Reported by Alibaba | Counts2% ref. weight |
Multilingual1 row
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Who ran it | Use in ranking |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProX | 82.2% | Best verified: Qwen3.7 Max · 87% | Gap4.8 behind | Reported by Alibaba | CountsWeighted 100% |
Inst. Following1 row
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Who ran it | Use in ranking |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IFEvalInstruction-Following Eval | 95% | Best verified: LFM2.5-24B-A2B · 96.8% | Gap1.8 behind | Reported by Alibaba | Shown only |
External signals1 row
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Who ran it | Use in ranking |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NYT ConnectionsNYT Connections LLM Benchmark (extended version) | 47.9% | Best verified: Gemini 4 Argon · 98.6% | Gap50.7 behind | Run by NYT Connections | Shown only |
Outlined bars are lab-reported or carried from an upstream page. Filled bars are benchmark-run or independent. Bars run 0–100; the dark tick marks the best source-verified value.
Lineage
The sequence follows explicit supersedes links. Each score is estimated for that model; a relative can inform a sparse estimate but never sets a floor, so a newer release can score below an earlier one. Scores and prices remain blank when the corresponding public row or first-party rate is unavailable.
Base entry
Spec sheet
Each documented value carries its source. Missing fields stay visible as not sourced or not published, rather than disappearing from the page.
- API model ID
- Not published
- Context window
- 262K
- Maximum output
- Not sourced yet
- Knowledge cutoff
- Not sourced yet
- Input modalities
- text, image, videoQwen3.5-27B model card
- Output modalities
- textQwen3.5-27B model card
- Parameters
- Not sourced yet
- Availability
- Not sourced yet
- Cloud regions
- Not tracked yet
- Lifecycle
- Established
- API capabilities
- Tool calling, structured outputs, and batch support are not tracked yet
- Prompt caching
- Not documented in the pricing record
- Self-host
- Open weights available; hardware estimate not sourced
- Rate limits
- Not tracked yet
How to read this profile
The visual layer above carries the decisions. These notes preserve the model, ranking, coverage, and family context behind the numbers.
Qwen3.5-27B ranks #108 of 215 on the public leaderboard with a score of 47.94/100. It does not yet have enough sourced coverage for a verified position.
Qwen3.5-27B is a open weight model with a 262K context window. It uses an explicit reasoning mode, which can improve complex problem solving while adding latency and token use.
Official exact-value benchmark snapshot from the Qwen/Qwen3.5-27B-FP8 model card. Native context is 262,144 tokens and the model card notes extensibility up to roughly 1M tokens with RoPE scaling.
21 of 906 tracked benchmark slots currently have displayable evidence. Missing categories stay blank.
Its strongest eligible category is Multilingual at #10, while its lowest eligible position is Coding at #100. a well-rounded choice across a range of tasks.
Last updated November 12, 2026. Runtime fields remain blank until a sourced snapshot exists.
Deployment options
Self-host and provider-specific paths stay separate from benchmark evidence so operating constraints are visible before a score becomes the whole decision.
Where to run Qwen3.5-27B by API
3 hosts publish a per-token price for it. Novita AI has the lowest output rate, $2.40 per million tokens. Prices read from each host’s own pages on November 11, 2026.
| Host | Input /1M | Output /1M | Cached /1M | Context |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Novita AI | $0.30 | $2.40 | — | 262K |
| DeepInfra | $0.26 | $2.60 | — | 262K |
| OpenRouter | $0.26 | $2.60 | — | 262K |
Published weights are available, but BenchLM does not yet have a sourced parameter and VRAM profile for this exact model. Hardware cost estimates stay unavailable until that sizing record is complete.
Estimate VRAM from known parametersQuestions
How does Qwen3.5-27B perform overall in AI benchmarks?
Qwen3.5-27B ranks #108 out of 215 models on the public BenchAlign leaderboard, with a score of 47.94/100. Its evidence status is Estimated, and this profile shows 21 source-displayable benchmark rows. The label describes evidence depth, not a provider quality claim; inspect category rows before choosing a workload.
Is Qwen3.5-27B good for knowledge and understanding?
Qwen3.5-27B ranks #96 out of 180 eligible models for knowledge and understanding, with a public category score of 45.1/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Is Qwen3.5-27B good for coding and programming?
Qwen3.5-27B ranks #100 out of 162 eligible models for coding and programming, with a public category score of 33.1/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Is Qwen3.5-27B good for reasoning and logic?
Qwen3.5-27B ranks #81 out of 160 eligible models for reasoning and logic, with a public category score of 39.3/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Is Qwen3.5-27B good for agentic tool use and computer tasks?
Qwen3.5-27B ranks #85 out of 135 eligible models for agentic tool use and computer tasks, with a public category score of 36.8/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Is Qwen3.5-27B good for multimodal and grounded tasks?
Qwen3.5-27B ranks #58 out of 67 eligible models for multimodal and grounded tasks, with a public category score of 50.5/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Is Qwen3.5-27B good for instruction following?
Qwen3.5-27B ranks #15 out of 157 eligible models for instruction following, with a public category score of 92.9/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Is Qwen3.5-27B good for multilingual tasks?
Qwen3.5-27B ranks #10 out of 17 eligible models for multilingual tasks, with a public category score of 87.1/100. That places it in the current top ten for this category. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Is Qwen3.5-27B open source?
Qwen3.5-27B is an open-weight model from Alibaba. Its weights can be downloaded for local or hosted deployment, subject to the published license. Open weight does not automatically mean open source: training data and training code may remain private, and commercial restrictions can still apply.
Does Qwen3.5-27B have full benchmark coverage on BenchLM?
No. Qwen3.5-27B currently has 34 source-displayable rows. The profile exposes published, non-generated evidence and leaves missing categories blank until an exact evaluation is available. Coverage describes how much was measured; it is not a penalty added to an individual benchmark result.
What is the context window size of Qwen3.5-27B?
Qwen3.5-27B has a reported context window of 262K in the exact-model catalog record. The value stays visible, but the profile marks its source link as unavailable instead of presenting it as directly documented. Maximum output length remains separate because providers often publish a different limit.