ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Qwen3.5 Flash vs Qwen3.6 Flash

Qwen3.5 Flash comes out ahead, 75 to 70 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Our pick

    Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.5 Flash

    Released Feb 23, 2026

    75/100
    • ECI144.0
    • Price$0.10 / $0.40
    • Context1M
    Full specs Remove Qwen3.5 Flash

  2. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.6 Flash

    Released Apr 27, 2026

    70/100
    • ECI143.3
    • Price$0.188 / $1.13
    • Context1M
    Full specs Remove Qwen3.6 Flash

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Qwen3.5 Flash is our pick

Qwen3.5 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 75/100 against Qwen3.6 Flash (70). It leads on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityQwen3.5 FlashCapabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3.5 Flash 144.0 · Qwen3.6 Flash 143.3
  • Lowest priceQwen3.5 FlashQwen3.5 Flash $0.175 · Qwen3.6 Flash $0.422 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextAbout the sameQwen3.5 Flash 1,000,000 · Qwen3.6 Flash 1,000,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsSame inputsQwen3.5 Flash: Text, Images, Video · Qwen3.6 Flash: Text, Images, Video
  • Self-hostingNo open weightsBoth are available only through APIs
How the score is built
MeasureWeightQwen3.5 FlashQwen3.6 Flash
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%7170
Price25%8668
Inputs & features15%8080
Context window10%6060
Overall100%75/10070/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Qwen3.5 Flash vs Qwen3.6 Flash specifications side by side
SpecificationQwen3.5 FlashAlibaba (Qwen)Qwen3.6 FlashAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)144.0 (best)143.3
ECI rank#82 of 148 (best)#85 of 148
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions82.3%83.3% (best)
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics18.3%22.5% (best)
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics84.4%84.4%
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions20.3% (best)15.9%
Price per million tokens
Input$0.10 (best)$0.188
Output$0.40 (best)$1.13
Cached input$0.01—
Blended (3:1)$0.175 (best)$0.422
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Alibaba APIOfficial Alibaba API
Limits
Context window1,000,000 tokens1,000,000 tokens
Max output65,536 tokens65,536 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesYes
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoNo
VideoYesYes
ReasoningYesYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputYesYes
Availability
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
API model IDqwen3.5-flashqwen3.6-flash
API providers816 (best)
ReleasedFeb 23, 2026Apr 27, 2026
Knowledge cutoff——
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Qwen3.5 Flash$1.80
  • Qwen3.6 Flash$4.13
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Qwen3.5 Flash or Qwen3.6 Flash?

Qwen3.5 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 75/100 against Qwen3.6 Flash (70). It leads on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3.5 Flash or Qwen3.6 Flash?

Qwen3.5 Flash is cheaper at $0.10 input / $0.40 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). Qwen3.6 Flash costs $0.188 input / $1.13 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.175 per million tokens for Qwen3.5 Flash versus $0.422 for Qwen3.6 Flash (2.4× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Qwen3.5 Flash scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3.5 Flash 144.0 (#82 of 148) and Qwen3.6 Flash 143.3 (#85 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (141.6–145.5 vs 140.9–144.7), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Qwen3.6 Flash 83.3%, Qwen3.5 Flash 82.3%; FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 — Qwen3.6 Flash 22.5%, Qwen3.5 Flash 18.3%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Qwen3.5 Flash 84.4%, Qwen3.6 Flash 84.4%; SimpleQA Verified — Qwen3.5 Flash 20.3%, Qwen3.6 Flash 15.9%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3.5 Flash and Qwen3.6 Flash yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Qwen3.5 Flash leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.5 Flash and Qwen3.6 Flash share the same 1,000,000-token context window. Maximum output per response: Qwen3.5 Flash up to 65,536, Qwen3.6 Flash up to 65,536 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Qwen3.5 Flash accepts text, images and video; Qwen3.6 Flash accepts text, images and video. They handle the same number of input types.

Are any of these open source?

No. Qwen3.5 Flash and Qwen3.6 Flash are proprietary and only available through APIs and apps.

Which is newer?

Qwen3.6 Flash is the newest, released Apr 27, 2026. Qwen3.5 Flash came out Feb 23, 2026.

How do you decide the winner?

Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons