Noometry

Model comparison

Qwen3.5 27B vs Step 5 Preview

Step 5 Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 41.4 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.5 27B costs 1.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Step 5 Preview's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

Qwen3.5 27B Alibaba (Qwen)

41.4

Rank #127 Confirmed

Step 5 Preview StepFun

43.8

Rank #78 Reported

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Qwen3.5 27B scores higher in 0 categories and Step 5 Preview in 2 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in coding, where Step 5 Preview leads 50.6 to 38.6.
  • Qwen3.5 27B is cheaper at $0.30 / $2.40 per million input/output tokens, against $1 / $2.70 for Step 5 Preview.
  • Step 5 Preview accepts more context: 1.02M tokens versus 262K.
  • Qwen3.5 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Qwen3.5 27BStep 5 Preview
ProviderAlibaba (Qwen)StepFun
Noometry Index41.443.8
Released2026-02-232026-09-16
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window262K1.02M
Max output66K66K
Input $ / M tokens$0.30$1
Output $ / M tokens$2.40$2.70
Results tracked283

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Step 5 Preview leads

Qwen3.5 27B: 38.6 (#159), Step 5 Preview: 50.6 (#40)

BenchmarkQwen3.5 27BStep 5 Preview
LMArena WebDev13571569
SciCode—58.9%
WeirdML39.5%—
LMArena Coding1427—
ALE-Bench349.45—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Qwen3.5 27B: —, Step 5 Preview: —

BenchmarkQwen3.5 27BStep 5 Preview
Vending-Bench 2201.98—

Reasoning Step 5 Preview leads

Qwen3.5 27B: 26.6 (#116), Step 5 Preview: 38.0 (#58)

BenchmarkQwen3.5 27BStep 5 Preview
NYT Connections (extended)47.9%—
CritPt—20.9%
Thematic Generalization45.5%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1414—
DTBench82.4%—
LMCA34%—

Math Not comparable

Qwen3.5 27B: 36.8 (#103), Step 5 Preview: —

BenchmarkQwen3.5 27BStep 5 Preview
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions56.7%—
LMArena Math1428—

Knowledge Not comparable

Qwen3.5 27B: 37.4 (#149), Step 5 Preview: —

BenchmarkQwen3.5 27BStep 5 Preview
Vectara Hallucination Rate12.1%—
LMArena Expert1428—

Multimodal Not comparable

Qwen3.5 27B: 38.7 (#56), Step 5 Preview: —

BenchmarkQwen3.5 27BStep 5 Preview
LMArena Vision1240—

Multilingual Not comparable

Qwen3.5 27B: 51.0 (#112), Step 5 Preview: —

BenchmarkQwen3.5 27BStep 5 Preview
LMArena Non-English1390—
LMArena Chinese1478—
LMArena French1409—
LMArena German1393—
LMArena Japanese1345—
LMArena Korean1359—
LMArena Russian1389—
LMArena Spanish1408—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Qwen3.5 27B: 73.7 (#114), Step 5 Preview: —

BenchmarkQwen3.5 27BStep 5 Preview
LMArena Instruction Following1393—

Long Context Not comparable

Qwen3.5 27B: 43.1 (#103), Step 5 Preview: —

BenchmarkQwen3.5 27BStep 5 Preview
LMArena Longer Query1413—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Qwen3.5 27B: 59.5 (#106), Step 5 Preview: —

BenchmarkQwen3.5 27BStep 5 Preview
LMArena Text1409—
LMArena Creative Writing1362—
LMArena Multi-Turn1410—

Frequently asked questions

Is Qwen3.5 27B better than Step 5 Preview?

Step 5 Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 41.4 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.5 27B costs 1.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Step 5 Preview's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3.5 27B or Step 5 Preview?

Qwen3.5 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $2.40 per million output tokens; Step 5 Preview lists at $1 and $2.70.

Is Qwen3.5 27B or Step 5 Preview better for coding?

Step 5 Preview scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.6 versus 38.6 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Step 5 Preview does, with 1.02M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks do Qwen3.5 27B and Step 5 Preview share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. Qwen3.5 27B has 28 scored results on Noometry and Step 5 Preview has 3.

Related comparisons

Go deeper