Is Qwen3.5-Flash a good deal?
Whether anything in this catalogue beats Qwen3.5-Flash on both quality and price, and what you give up if it does. A computation on the current catalogue, not an opinion.
13 undominated of 136 · Sep 23, 2026
As of Sep 23, 2026, DeepSeek V4 Flash 0423 scores higher and costs less than Qwen3.5-Flash for Balanced on LMArena, but it is not a drop-in. You would give up: image, video.
Inspect model evidence Compare differences & requirements
DeepSeek V4 Flash 0423 scores 34.1 points higher and costs 9% less, but you would give up: image, video.
LMArena Elo · higher is better
Scale starts at 1040 Elo
1397.7
Effective $/M · Balanced · lower is better
$0.114/M
LMArena Elo · higher is better
Scale starts at 1040 Elo
1431.8
Effective $/M · Balanced · lower is better
$0.103/M
Qwen3.5-Flash takes text, image, video, returns up to 65,536 tokens from a 1,000,000-token context, and is listed by 1 seller.
Compared against 136 rated, priced models on this lens: nothing dominates it outright, 1 more dominates it but gives something up. Qwen3.5-Flash scores 1397.7 at $0.11 per million tokens for this mix.
Higher score, lower price, named losses
Not a drop-in. The loss is why these are not a recommendation.
| Model | LMArena | Effective $/M | You give up |
|---|---|---|---|
| DeepSeek V4 Flash 0423 | 1431.8 | $0.103/M | image, video |
The link keeps the model and mix, using the current catalogue. Monthly spend and switching cost stay in this browser tab and are left out of the link.
Saved decision references
Save the model, workload, catalogue date and capability-preservation rule in this browser. Spend, switching cost and bill contents are not saved. No account or notifications.
Constraint: replacements must preserve the model’s capabilities; any losses remain named trade-offs.
Historical decisions cannot be fully replayed from saved references: past prices, scores and capability evidence are not stored.