Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking vs Qwen: Qwen3.5 Flash
Compare Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking and Qwen: Qwen3.5 Flash, both from Qwen, context windows of 66K vs 1.0M, tested across 53 shared challenges.
Our Verdict
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
Qwen: Qwen3.5 Flash
No community votes yet. On paper, these are closely matched - try both with your actual task to see which fits your workflow.
Qwen: Qwen3.5 Flash is 3.8x cheaper per token — worth considering if cost matters.
Too close to call
API pricing
Cost per 1M tokens
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
Input
$0.15
Output
$1.50
Qwen: Qwen3.5 Flash
Input
$0.10
1.5× cheaper
Output
$0.40
3.8× cheaper
Qwen: Qwen3.5 Flash is cheaper on both — 1.5× input, 3.8× output
Writing DNA
Style Comparison
Similarity
51%
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking uses 22.6x more emoji
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
Qwen: Qwen3.5 Flash
54%Vocabulary50%
16wSentence Length14w
0.31Hedging0.35
6.0Bold6.9
4.5Lists4.2
0.58Emoji0.03
0.88Headings1.00
0.10Transitions0.15
Based on 17 + 23 text responses
Research
What we learned reading every model
FAQ
