Qwen3.5 122B A10B vs Qwen3.6 Flash

Compare Qwen3.5 122B A10B and Qwen3.6 Flash side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, OCR, and Open Prompt.

Compare Qwen3.5 122B A10B vs Qwen3.6 Flash 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
QwenQwen3.5 122B A10B
Run to compare this model.
QwenQwen3.6 Flash
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

Qwen3.5 122B A10B vs Qwen3.6 Flash: Overview

Qwen3.5 122B A10B

Qwen3.5-122B-A10B is a high-capacity multimodal Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) model developed by Alibaba’s Qwen team as part of the Qwen3.5 model family. The architecture contains 122 billion total parameters while activating roughly 10 billion per token through sparse expert routing, allowing the model to balance large-scale reasoning ability with relatively efficient inference compared to dense models of similar size.

The model is designed to process both text and visual inputs within a unified multimodal framework, enabling tasks that require reasoning across images, documents, charts, and natural language. This makes it suitable for applications such as document understanding, diagram interpretation, and complex visual question answering.

Qwen3.5-122B-A10B supports a native context window of approximately 256,000 tokens, which can be extended further through techniques such as YaRN scaling to support very long-context workloads. Released under the Apache 2.0 license, it builds on earlier Qwen multimodal systems and provides developers with an open-weight model capable of handling demanding multimodal reasoning and analysis tasks.

Qwen3.6 Flash

Qwen3.6-Flash is the production API variant of the Qwen3.6 model series, developed by the Qwen team at Alibaba Group. It is built on the Qwen3.6-35B-A3B architecture, which combines a hybrid linear attention mechanism with sparse Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) routing to achieve high-throughput inference with reduced latency. The model is natively multimodal, processing both text and images within a unified early-fusion architecture, and supports 201 languages and dialects. It operates in a hybrid thinking mode, capable of generating explicit chain-of-thought reasoning before producing a final response, with the option to disable thinking for direct output. A Thinking Preservation feature allows reasoning context to be retained across multi-turn conversations, which is particularly useful for iterative agentic workflows.

The model is trained with reinforcement learning scaled across large-scale agent environments and covers a broad range of tasks including agentic coding, frontend development, visual understanding, document processing, and tool use. Compared to the open-weight Qwen3.6-35B-A3B, the Flash API variant extends the default context window to 1 million tokens and includes built-in production features such as native function calling and official tool integrations. The underlying architecture achieves near-100% multimodal training efficiency relative to text-only training, and the model demonstrates strong performance on agentic coding benchmarks including SWE-bench Verified.

Qwen3.5 122B A10B vs Qwen3.6 Flash Comparison Table

PropertyQwen3.5 122B A10BQwen3.6 Flash
OrganizationQwenQwen
Categoryopenclosed
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateFeb 2026Apr 2026
Context Window256K1.0M
Parameters122B35B (3B active, MoE)
LicenseApache 2.0Proprietary
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$0.260$0.188
Output $/1M$2.08$1.13
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoDemo
OCRDemoDemo
Vision Language
Visual Question AnsweringDemoDemo
Chart Question Answering
Document Question Answering
Object Detection
Model Features
LLMs with Vision Capabilities
Multimodal Vision
Vision Evalspass/fail results · 67 prompts
Score key:≥75%40–74%<40%
Visual Understanding
Overall Score
76.12%
Avg Response Time1.77s
Median input tokensincl. image tokens1.2K
Median output tokens7
Est. cost / taskon this benchmark$0.0003
Defect Detection
86.7%(13/15)
Document Understanding
77.8%(7/9)
Object Counting
40%(4/10)
Object Understanding
92.9%(13/14)
Spatial Understanding
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