Model comparison

Qwen3.5-9B vs Solar Pro4

Solar Pro4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.5 to 33.3 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.5-9B costs 4.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Solar Pro4's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

Qwen3.5-9B Alibaba (Qwen)

33.3

Rank #235 Confirmed

Solar Pro4 Upstage

41.5

Rank #123 Confirmed

Summary

  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.5-9B leads 46.0 to 39.0.
  • Qwen3.5-9B is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.15 per million input/output tokens, against $0.30 / $1.20 for Solar Pro4.
  • Solar Pro4 accepts more context: 524K tokens versus 262K.
  • Qwen3.5-9B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Qwen3.5-9B and Solar Pro4 specifications
Qwen3.5-9BSolar Pro4
ProviderAlibaba (Qwen)Upstage
Noometry Index33.341.5
Released2026-02-232026-08-06
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window262K524K
Max output66K131K
Input $ / M tokens$0.10$0.30
Output $ / M tokens$0.15$1.20
Results tracked1018

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

Category by category

Coding Solar Pro4 leads

Qwen3.5-9B: 35.3 (#213), Solar Pro4: 39.9 (#135)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3.5-9BSolar Pro4
LMArena WebDev—1371
SciCode27.5%—
LMArena Coding—1439

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Qwen3.5-9B: 14.4 (#143), Solar Pro4: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3.5-9BSolar Pro4
Terminal-Bench9.2%—

Reasoning Solar Pro4 leads

Qwen3.5-9B: 22.5 (#178), Solar Pro4: 27.3 (#107)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3.5-9BSolar Pro4
CritPt0.3%—
Chess Puzzles12%—
LMArena Hard Prompts—1398
DTBench71.2%—
LMCA24.5%—
Epoch Capabilities Index139.45—

Math Solar Pro4 leads

Qwen3.5-9B: 33.5 (#174), Solar Pro4: 36.1 (#129)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3.5-9BSolar Pro4
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions48.5%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202561.7%—
LMArena Math—1418

Knowledge Qwen3.5-9B leads

Qwen3.5-9B: 46.0 (#77), Solar Pro4: 39.0 (#128)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3.5-9BSolar Pro4
GPQA Diamond79%—
LMArena Expert—1421

Multilingual Not comparable

Qwen3.5-9B: —, Solar Pro4: 49.0 (#134)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3.5-9BSolar Pro4
LMArena Non-English—1362
LMArena Chinese—1417
LMArena French—1403
LMArena German—1351
LMArena Japanese—1300
LMArena Korean—1383
LMArena Russian—1360
LMArena Spanish—1408

Instruction Following Not comparable

Qwen3.5-9B: —, Solar Pro4: 72.8 (#128)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3.5-9BSolar Pro4
LMArena Instruction Following—1376

Long Context Not comparable

Qwen3.5-9B: —, Solar Pro4: 42.0 (#125)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3.5-9BSolar Pro4
LMArena Longer Query—1379

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Qwen3.5-9B: —, Solar Pro4: 56.7 (#133)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3.5-9BSolar Pro4
LMArena Text—1386
LMArena Creative Writing—1313
LMArena Multi-Turn—1391

Frequently asked questions

Is Qwen3.5-9B better than Solar Pro4?

Solar Pro4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.5 to 33.3 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.5-9B costs 4.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Solar Pro4's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3.5-9B or Solar Pro4?

Qwen3.5-9B is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; Solar Pro4 lists at $0.30 and $1.20.

Is Qwen3.5-9B or Solar Pro4 better for coding?

Solar Pro4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.9 versus 35.3 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Solar Pro4 does, with 524K tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks do Qwen3.5-9B and Solar Pro4 share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen3.5-9B has 10 scored results on Noometry and Solar Pro4 has 18.

Related comparisons

Go deeper