Capability
59.6/100
field median 57.7
#62 of 217 ranked models
Five or fewer confirmed AI changes, with original sources, on mornings when something changed.A free source-linked morning brief.
Start free briefReleased Mar 4, 2026 — see all recent releases
Data as of August 13, 2026 · How the score is built
Instruction Following ranks #8. A well-rounded choice across a range of tasks.
16 published rows leave some tracked benchmark slots empty. No comparable first-party API token rate is published.
EVA-Bench is an owner-defined voice evaluation. Its result stays separate from BenchLM's weighted text-model ranking.
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.
Capability
59.6/100
field median 57.7
#62 of 217 ranked models
Price
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
input median $1
No comparable first-party hosted token rate
Speed
77tok/s
field median 93 tok/s
First token 31.79 s
Context
262Ktokens
field median 200,000
Reported for this model; direct source link not stored
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
The dashed outline is median of 6 nearest peers.
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.
Each documented value carries its source. Missing fields stay visible as not sourced or not published, rather than disappearing from the page.
Self-host and provider-specific paths stay separate from benchmark evidence so operating constraints are visible before a score becomes the whole decision.
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 parametersScores 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 #59 of 129Percentile 55thWeight 22%4 benchmarksVerified | 48.8 | #59 of 129 | 55th | 22% | 4 benchmarks | Verified |
| CodingRank #41 of 134Percentile 70thWeight 20%2 benchmarksVerified | 54.1 | #41 of 134 | 70th | 20% | 2 benchmarks | Verified |
| ReasoningRank Not rankedWeight 17%1 benchmarkVerified | 75.6 | Not ranked | Not available | 17% | 1 benchmark | Verified |
| KnowledgeRank #19 of 55Percentile 67thWeight 12%3 benchmarksVerified | 76.8 | #19 of 55 | 67th | 12% | 3 benchmarks | Verified |
| MathWeight 5%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | Not ranked | Not available | 5% | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
| MultilingualRank #10 of 13Percentile 25thWeight 7%1 benchmarkVerified | 36.8 | #10 of 13 | 25th | 7% | 1 benchmark | Verified |
| MultimodalRank #32 of 33Percentile 3rdWeight 12%4 benchmarksMixed sources | 0.0 | #32 of 33 | 3rd | 12% | 4 benchmarks | Mixed sources |
| Inst. FollowingRank #8 of 38Percentile 81stWeight 5%1 benchmarkVerified | 92.5 | #8 of 38 | 81st | 5% | 1 benchmark | Verified |
Coding opens by default. The marker compares each value with the best source-verified result in the catalog; provisional leaders do not set the reference. Expand the remaining categories for every published row.
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-Rebench | Score58.9% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 4.6 · 65.3% | Gap6.4 behind | WeightWeighted 20% | Benchmark exact |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSoftware Engineering Benchmark Verified | Score72.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 96% | Gap23.6 behind | WeightWeighted 16% | Provider exact |
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | Score41.6% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-5.6 Sol · 91.9% | Gap50.3 behind | WeightWeighted 38% | Provider exact |
| OSWorld-Verified | Score56.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 86.1% | Gap29.9 behind | WeightWeighted 34% | Provider exact |
| BrowseComp | Score61% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-5.6 Sol · 92.2% | Gap31.2 behind | WeightWeighted 28% | Provider exact |
| Gert LabsGert Labs Composite Game Benchmark | Score39.41% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 4.8 · 72.97% | Gap33.6 behind | WeightDisplay only | Benchmark exact |
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LongBench v2 | Score60.6% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 66.3% | Gap5.7 behind | WeightWeighted 38% | Provider exact |
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProMassive Multitask Language Understanding Professional | Score86.1% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.7 Max · 89.6% | Gap3.5 behind | WeightWeighted 30% | Provider exact |
| SuperGPQASuperGPQA: Scaling LLM Evaluation Across 285 Graduate Disciplines | Score65.6% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) · 73.9% | Gap8.3 behind | WeightWeighted 7% | Provider exact |
| GPQAGraduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A | Score85.5% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Sakana Fugu-Ultra · 95.5% | Gap10 behind | WeightWeighted 7% | Provider exact |
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProX | Score82.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.7 Max · 87% | Gap4.8 behind | WeightWeighted 100% | Provider exact |
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MMMUMassive Multi-discipline Multimodal Understanding | Score82.3% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.6-27B · 82.9% | Gap0.6 behind | WeightDisplay only | Reported |
| MMVUMultimodal Multi-disciplinary Video Understanding | Score73.3% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 82.4% | Gap9.1 behind | WeightDisplay only | Reported |
| MathVision | Score86.0% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 95.2% | Gap9.2 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| V* | Score93.7% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Kimi K2.6 · 96.9% | Gap3.2 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IFEvalInstruction-Following Eval | Score95% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.5-27B · 95% | GapBest verified | WeightWeighted 35% | Provider exact |
The sequence follows explicit supersedes links. Scores and prices remain blank when the corresponding public row or first-party rate is unavailable.
Mar 4, 2026 · you are here
Qwen3.5-27BScore 59.6 · Price not listed
Base entry
The visual layer above carries the decisions. These notes preserve the model, ranking, coverage, and family context behind the numbers.
Qwen3.5-27B ranks #62 of 217 on the public leaderboard with a score of 59.64/100. Its source-verified position is #41 of 104.
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.
16 of 431 tracked benchmark slots currently have displayable evidence. Missing categories stay blank.
Its strongest eligible category is Instruction Following at #8, while its lowest eligible position is Agentic at #59. a well-rounded choice across a range of tasks.
Alibaba · Model release
Qwen3.5-27B ranks #62 out of 217 models on the public BenchAlign leaderboard, with a score of 59.64/100. Its evidence status is Supported, and this profile shows 16 source-displayable benchmark rows. The label describes evidence depth, not a provider quality claim; inspect category rows before choosing a workload.
Qwen3.5-27B ranks #19 out of 55 eligible models for knowledge and understanding, with a public category score of 76.8/100. 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.
Qwen3.5-27B ranks #41 out of 134 eligible models for coding and programming, with a public category score of 54.1/100. 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.
Qwen3.5-27B has source-displayable benchmark coverage for reasoning and logic, but the public category table does not assign it a rank there. The individual rows remain available for inspection. A missing category position means the evidence threshold was not met; it does not convert the model's unmeasured work into a zero.
Qwen3.5-27B ranks #59 out of 129 eligible models for agentic tool use and computer tasks, with a public category score of 48.8/100. 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.
Qwen3.5-27B ranks #32 out of 33 eligible models for multimodal and grounded tasks, with a public category score of 0/100. 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.
Qwen3.5-27B ranks #8 out of 38 eligible models for instruction following, with a public category score of 92.5/100. That places it in the current top ten for this category. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Qwen3.5-27B ranks #10 out of 13 eligible models for multilingual tasks, with a public category score of 36.8/100. That places it in the current top ten for this category. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
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.
No. Qwen3.5-27B currently has 28 source-displayable rows across 431 tracked benchmark slots. 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.
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.
Related resources
Last updated August 13, 2026. Runtime fields remain blank until a sourced snapshot exists.
Get one weekly email when material rank, price, availability, or benchmark evidence changes are worth revisiting.
Read a sample issueJoin 2,000+ readers.