Skip to main content
Radar

Five or fewer confirmed AI changes, with original sources, on mornings when something changed.A free source-linked morning brief.

Start free brief

Qwen3.5-27B

CurrentReleased Mar 4, 2026Open WeightReasoning262K contextAlibaba model documentation

Released Mar 4, 2026 see all recent releases

Decision reading
Qwen3.5-27B scores 59.6 out of 100 and ranks #62 of 217. This profile shows 16 source-displayable benchmark rows; its strongest eligible category is Instruction Following at #8. Published weights can be self-hosted, but infrastructure cost varies and is not a comparable API token rate.

Data as of August 13, 2026 · How the score is built

Strongest published evidence

Instruction Following ranks #8. A well-rounded choice across a range of tasks.

Validate before choosing

16 published rows leave some tracked benchmark slots empty. No comparable first-party API token rate is published.

Voice benchmark evidence

EVA-Bench is an owner-defined voice evaluation. Its result stays separate from BenchLM's weighted text-model ranking.

Coverage
Evaluated system
Owner label
Qwen3.5-27B
Result source
Official paper
Participant or pipeline component identified from the benchmark paper; no weighted BenchLM score is assigned.

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.

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

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

  • Agentic55th percentile
  • Coding70th percentile
  • ReasoningNot eligible
  • Knowledge67th percentile
  • MathNot eligible
  • Multilingual25th percentile
  • Multimodal3rd percentile
  • Instruction following81st percentile

The dashed outline is median of 6 nearest peers.

Eligible category ranks

  1. Agentic#59/129
  2. Coding#41/134
  3. ReasoningNot ranked
  4. Knowledge#19/55
  5. MathNot ranked
  6. Multilingual#10/13
  7. Multimodal#32/33
  8. Inst. Following#8/38
Top decileTop quartileMid-fieldNot eligible

How 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.

  1. Agentic4/4 verified
  2. Coding2/2 verified
  3. Reasoning1/1 verified
  4. Knowledge3/3 verified
  5. MathNot measured
  6. Multilingual1/1 verified
  7. Multimodal2/4 verified
  8. Inst. Following1/1 verified
Verified sourceProvisionalNot measured

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
Not sourced yet
Output modalities
Not sourced yet
Parameters
Not sourced yet
Availability
Not sourced yet
Cloud regions
Not tracked yet
Lifecycle
Current
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

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.

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 parameters

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 scores, ranks, weighting, benchmark coverage, and evidence status
CategoryScore
AgenticRank #59 of 129Percentile 55thWeight 22%4 benchmarksVerified48.8
CodingRank #41 of 134Percentile 70thWeight 20%2 benchmarksVerified54.1
ReasoningRank Not rankedWeight 17%1 benchmarkVerified75.6
KnowledgeRank #19 of 55Percentile 67thWeight 12%3 benchmarksVerified76.8
MathWeight 5%0 benchmarksNot measuredNot measured
MultilingualRank #10 of 13Percentile 25thWeight 7%1 benchmarkVerified36.8
MultimodalRank #32 of 33Percentile 3rdWeight 12%4 benchmarksMixed sources0.0
Inst. FollowingRank #8 of 38Percentile 81stWeight 5%1 benchmarkVerified92.5

Benchmark ledger

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.

Coding2 rows
Coding benchmark values, best verified comparison, weight, and source status
SWE-RebenchScore58.9%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Claude Opus 4.6 · 65.3%

Gap6.4 behindWeightWeighted 20%
SWE-bench VerifiedSoftware Engineering Benchmark VerifiedScore72.4%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 96%

Gap23.6 behindWeightWeighted 16%
Agentic4 rows
Agentic benchmark values, best verified comparison, weight, and source status
Terminal-Bench 2.0Score41.6%Versus best verified row

Best verified: GPT-5.6 Sol · 91.9%

Gap50.3 behindWeightWeighted 38%
OSWorld-VerifiedScore56.2%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 86.1%

Gap29.9 behindWeightWeighted 34%
BrowseCompScore61%Versus best verified row

Best verified: GPT-5.6 Sol · 92.2%

Gap31.2 behindWeightWeighted 28%
Gert LabsGert Labs Composite Game BenchmarkScore39.41%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Claude Opus 4.8 · 72.97%

Gap33.6 behindWeightDisplay only
Benchmark exact
Reasoning1 row
Reasoning benchmark values, best verified comparison, weight, and source status
LongBench v2Score60.6%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 66.3%

Gap5.7 behindWeightWeighted 38%
Knowledge3 rows
Knowledge benchmark values, best verified comparison, weight, and source status
MMLU-ProMassive Multitask Language Understanding ProfessionalScore86.1%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Qwen3.7 Max · 89.6%

Gap3.5 behindWeightWeighted 30%
SuperGPQASuperGPQA: Scaling LLM Evaluation Across 285 Graduate DisciplinesScore65.6%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) · 73.9%

Gap8.3 behindWeightWeighted 7%
GPQAGraduate-Level Google-Proof Q&AScore85.5%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Sakana Fugu-Ultra · 95.5%

Gap10 behindWeightWeighted 7%
Multilingual1 row
Multilingual benchmark values, best verified comparison, weight, and source status
MMLU-ProXScore82.2%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Qwen3.7 Max · 87%

Gap4.8 behindWeightWeighted 100%
Multimodal4 rows
Multimodal benchmark values, best verified comparison, weight, and source status
MMMUMassive Multi-discipline Multimodal UnderstandingScore82.3%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Qwen3.6-27B · 82.9%

Gap0.6 behindWeightDisplay only
MMVUMultimodal Multi-disciplinary Video UnderstandingScore73.3%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 82.4%

Gap9.1 behindWeightDisplay only
MathVisionScore86.0%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 95.2%

Gap9.2 behindWeightDisplay only
V*Score93.7%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Kimi K2.6 · 96.9%

Gap3.2 behindWeightDisplay only
Inst. Following1 row
Inst. Following benchmark values, best verified comparison, weight, and source status
IFEvalInstruction-Following EvalScore95%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Qwen3.5-27B · 95%

GapBest verifiedWeightWeighted 35%

Lineage

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

Qwen3.5-27B

Score 59.6 · Price not listed

Base entry

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 #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.

Radar

Qwen3.5-27B release history

Full release history

Frequently asked questions

How does Qwen3.5-27B perform overall in AI benchmarks?

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.

Is Qwen3.5-27B good for knowledge and understanding?

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.

Is Qwen3.5-27B good for coding and programming?

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.

Is Qwen3.5-27B good for reasoning and logic?

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.

Is Qwen3.5-27B good for agentic tool use and computer tasks?

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.

Is Qwen3.5-27B good for multimodal and grounded tasks?

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.

Is Qwen3.5-27B good for instruction following?

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.

Is Qwen3.5-27B good for multilingual tasks?

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.

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 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.

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.

Last updated August 13, 2026. Runtime fields remain blank until a sourced snapshot exists.

Watch Qwen3.5-27B in the weekly brief

Get one weekly email when material rank, price, availability, or benchmark evidence changes are worth revisiting.

Read a sample issue

Join 2,000+ readers.