GPT-5.5 vs Qwen3.5 27B

Compare GPT-5.5 and Qwen3.5 27B side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, Open Prompt, and OCR.

Compare GPT-5.5 vs Qwen3.5 27B live

Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.

Extract and compare text from images across multiple models.

Open OCR in the full playground
OpenAIGPT-5.5
Run to compare this model.
QwenQwen3.5 27B
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

OpenAI

GPT-5.5 vs Qwen3.5 27B: Overview

GPT-5.5

GPT-5.5 is a multimodal large language model released by OpenAI on April 23, 2026, engineered for autonomous, multi-step knowledge work and agentic workflows. It accepts text, images, and code as input, featuring enhanced spatial reasoning and visual grounding to support its computer use capabilities for operating software and navigating UI elements. Built to execute complex workflows end-to-end, the model interprets loosely defined tasks, selects appropriate tools, and performs self-verification with minimal user intervention. It is available in a standard version, a Thinking mode for extended reasoning budgets, and a Pro variant that uses parallel test-time compute for maximum precision on complex tasks.

Co-optimized with NVIDIA for GB200 NVL72 infrastructure, GPT-5.5 delivers per-token latency comparable to its predecessor GPT-5.4 while maintaining a 1-million-token context window. Despite increased capability, the model achieves greater token efficiency in coding and data analysis workflows, often completing tasks with fewer total tokens than previous versions. OpenAI reports a 60% reduction in hallucination rate compared to GPT-5.4, improving reliability for accuracy-sensitive applications. API access is available via the Responses and Chat Completions endpoints at $5 per million input tokens and $30 per million output tokens, double the unit price of GPT-5.4.

Qwen3.5 27B

Qwen3.5-27B is a multimodal dense hybrid model developed by Alibaba Cloud’s Qwen team and released in February 2026 as a high-precision entry in the Qwen3.5 "Medium" series. Unlike its Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) siblings, the 27B model utilizes a dense architecture combining Gated Delta Networks with a feed-forward structure, activating its full parameter suite for every inference to maximize reliability. This design provides the highest instruction-following and coding accuracy in its class, with a notable IFEval score of 95.0. The model features a native 262K-token context window, extensible to 1M tokens via YaRN (RoPE scaling), and is released under the Apache-2.0 license.

Optimized for agentic workflows, Qwen3.5-27B employs an early-fusion architecture that treats visual and textual data as a unified stream for deep cross-modal reasoning. This unified approach allows the model to excel in technical analysis and software engineering, matching GPT-5-mini with a 72.4% score on SWE-bench Verified. While the larger MoE variants in the family lead in raw knowledge benchmarks, the 27B model offers a stable and high-density alternative for structured data extraction and spatial perception, contributing to the Qwen3.5 family’s generational leap in OCR accuracy over the previous Qwen3-VL series.

GPT-5.5 vs Qwen3.5 27B Comparison Table

PropertyGPT-5.5Qwen3.5 27B
OrganizationOpenAIQwen
Categoryclosedopen
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateApr 2026Feb 2026
Context Window1.0M262K
Parameters27B
LicenseProprietaryApache 2.0
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$5.00$0.195
Output $/1M$30.00$1.56
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoDemo
Object DetectionDemo
OCRDemoDemo
Vision Language
Visual Question AnsweringDemoDemo
ClassificationDemo
Model Features
LLMs with Vision Capabilities
Multimodal Vision
Vision Evalspass/fail results · 67 prompts
Score key:≥75%40–74%<40%
Overall Score
77.61%
71.64%
Avg Response Time30.12s1.98s
Median input tokensincl. image tokens1.4K1.2K
Median output tokens1387
Est. cost / taskon this benchmark$0.011$0.0002
Defect Detection
86.7%(13/15)
80%(12/15)
Document Understanding
88.9%(8/9)
77.8%(7/9)
Object Counting
30%(3/10)
40%(4/10)
Object Understanding
92.9%(13/14)
78.6%(11/14)
Spatial Understanding
78.9%(15/19)
73.7%(14/19)

Output tokens (incl. reasoning) and est. cost / task are measured on this benchmark from a single low-temperature run, and shown only for models whose run covered at least 90% of prompts. Methodology