Model comparison
Qwen3.5-Flash vs Sonar
Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.5 to 38.5 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)
PerplexitySummary
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.5-Flash leads 33.7 to 21.1.
- Qwen3.5-Flash is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $1 / $1 for Sonar.
- Qwen3.5-Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.
Side by side
| Qwen3.5-Flash | Sonar | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Perplexity |
| Noometry Index | 42.5 | 38.5 |
| Released | 2026-02-23 | 2024-01-01 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1M | 128K |
| Max output | 66K | 4K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.10 | $1 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.40 | $1 |
| Results tracked | 32 | 7 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Sonar leads
Qwen3.5-Flash: 34.2 (#242), Sonar: 35.7 (#221)
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-Flash | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1244 | — |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 35.1% |
| LMArena Coding | 1412 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 221.8 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Qwen3.5-Flash: —, Sonar: —
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-Flash | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| Vending-Bench 2 | 462.69 | — |
Reasoning Qwen3.5-Flash leads
Qwen3.5-Flash: 33.7 (#72), Sonar: 21.1 (#227)
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-Flash | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 21% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 46.3% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1403 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 20% | — |
| DTBench | 82.9% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 37.9% |
| LMCA | 29.1% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 143.98 | — |
| LiveBench | — | 46.9% |
Math Qwen3.5-Flash leads
Qwen3.5-Flash: 37.4 (#158), Sonar: 33.7 (#200)
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-Flash | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 18.2% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 84.4% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 41.6% |
| LMArena Math | 1407 | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 6.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 0% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Qwen3.5-Flash: 43.2 (#93), Sonar: —
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-Flash | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 82.3% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 20.3% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 10.5% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1407 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Qwen3.5-Flash: 50.5 (#121), Sonar: —
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-Flash | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1385 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1446 | — |
| LMArena French | 1412 | — |
| LMArena German | 1390 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1368 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1344 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1379 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1400 | — |
Instruction Following Qwen3.5-Flash leads
Qwen3.5-Flash: 72.6 (#139), Sonar: 71.4 (#150)
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-Flash | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 76.2% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1374 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Qwen3.5-Flash: 42.4 (#124), Sonar: —
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-Flash | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1392 | — |
Writing & Preference Qwen3.5-Flash leads
Qwen3.5-Flash: 57.9 (#122), Sonar: 52.6 (#167)
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-Flash | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1397 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1343 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1393 | — |
| LiveBench Language | — | 44.1% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Qwen3.5-Flash better than Sonar?
Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.5 to 38.5 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Qwen3.5-Flash or Sonar?
Qwen3.5-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Sonar lists at $1 and $1.
Is Qwen3.5-Flash or Sonar better for coding?
Sonar scores higher on coding benchmarks: 35.7 versus 34.2 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3.5-Flash does, with 1M tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do Qwen3.5-Flash and Sonar share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen3.5-Flash has 32 scored results on Noometry and Sonar has 7.