Compare / Qwen3.5-27B vs GPT-5 nano
Qwen3.5-27B vs GPT-5 nano
Which is cheaper, which is more capable, and which does better at each kind of work, from 15 results on 3 sources that measured both models.
Of the 15 results both models have, the better value on each. Results whose reported ranges overlap are too close to call.
Results as of 13 October 2026 (catalogue release 2026-10-13-2e2420e3c5cc). See also Alibaba vs OpenAI, every model from both labs.
Qwen3.5-27B or GPT-5 nano? The short answer
Pick Qwen3.5-27B if quality matters most: it scores higher (Intelligence Index 22.9 against 13.0). Pick GPT-5 nano if cost matters more: it costs 5.4 times less per token.
- GPT-5 nano is cheaper: $0.14 against $0.74 per million tokens, 5.4 times less.
- Qwen3.5-27B scores higher on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index: 22.9 against 13.0.
- Qwen3.5-27B is newer: released 24 Feb 2026, against 7 Aug 2025 for GPT-5 nano.
- On third-party benchmarks, on the results both models have: Qwen3.5-27B does better for reasoning and knowledge and writing; GPT-5 nano for sticking to the facts.
Head to head
Every fact side by side
| Qwen3.5-27B | GPT-5 nano | |
|---|---|---|
| Price per million tokens | $0.27 in · $2.16 out | $0.050 in · $0.40 out |
| Blended (3 in : 1 out) | $0.74 | $0.14 |
| Cheapest host, blended | $0.54 (Alibaba) | $0.14 (Azure) |
| Intelligence Index | 22.9 | 13.0 |
| Spring Prompt overall | – | – |
| Output speed, tokens a second | – | – |
| Context window | 262,144 tokens | 400,000 tokens |
| Released | 24 Feb 2026 (newer) | 7 Aug 2025 |
| Weights | Open | Closed |
| Developer based in | China | the US |
Prices are the developer's list price where we have read it, otherwise the typical host on OpenRouter; see every model's price. Intelligence and speed from Artificial Analysis.
Which is better for what
Each model's rank among the models on sale today, for each kind of work, from our own benchmarks and licensed sources. Further right is better; the better rank is in green.
Every shared result
Each model's best result on every measure both have, grouped by benchmark, with the setting that produced it. Under each measure, every model that benchmark has measured is a grey tick, best to the right, so you can see where the two sit in the field. The headline measures of each benchmark come first; the rest are under "Show all". Green marks the better value; where a source reports ranges that overlap, neither is marked.
| Measure | Qwen3.5-27B | GPT-5 nano |
|---|---|---|
| Arena (formerly LMArena) reported by Arena (formerly LMArena) · 3 results | ||
| Overall · TextArena rating, higher is better 129 · 207 of 387 measured | 1,409 | 1,338high reasoning |
| Business, management and finance · TextArena rating, higher is better 128 · 204 of 380 measured | 1,408 | 1,339high reasoning |
| Creative writing · TextArena rating, higher is better 145 · 268 of 385 measured | 1,358 | 1,247high reasoning |
| Artificial Analysis reported by Artificial Analysis · 3 results | ||
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence Indexindex score, higher is better 86 · 144 of 243 measured | 22.9 | 13.0high reasoning |
| GPQA Diamond% of questions, higher is better 74 · 162 of 231 measured | 85.8% | 67.6%high reasoning |
| Humanity's Last Exam% of questions, higher is better 95 · 160 of 242 measured | 23.9% | 9.5%high reasoning |
| Vectara Hallucination Leaderboard reported by Vectara Hallucination Leaderboard · 2 results | ||
| Hallucination rate · Vectara% of summaries, lower is better 80 · 62 of 104 measured | 12.1% | 10.5% |
| Answer rate · Vectara% of documents, higher is better 31 · 1 of 104 measured | 99.8% | 100.0% |
Show all 15 results (7 more)
| Measure | Qwen3.5-27B | GPT-5 nano |
|---|---|---|
| Arena (formerly LMArena) reported by Arena (formerly LMArena) · 3 results | ||
| Expert prompts · TextArena rating, higher is better 112 · 191 of 338 measured | 1,441 | 1,354high reasoning |
| Instruction following · TextArena rating, higher is better 122 · 200 of 387 measured | 1,401 | 1,327high reasoning |
| Writing, literature and language · TextArena rating, higher is better 135 · 247 of 386 measured | 1,380 | 1,289high reasoning |
| Artificial Analysis reported by Artificial Analysis · 4 results | ||
| IFBench% of instructions, higher is better 24 · 64 of 195 measured | 75.6% | 67.6%high reasoning |
| Long-context reasoning (AA-LCR)% of questions, higher is better 63 · 162 of 233 measured | 77.7% | 45.0%high reasoning |
| Terminal-Bench Hard% of tasks, higher is better 61 · 100 of 190 measured | 32.6% | 17.4%medium reasoning |
| τ²-bench telecom% of tasks, higher is better 28 · 119 of 193 measured | 93.9% | 36.6%high reasoning |
Compare them with other models
Quick answers
Is Qwen3.5-27B better than GPT-5 nano?
Pick Qwen3.5-27B if quality matters most: it scores higher (Intelligence Index 22.9 against 13.0). Pick GPT-5 nano if cost matters more: it costs 5.4 times less per token.
Which is cheaper, Qwen3.5-27B or GPT-5 nano?
GPT-5 nano is cheaper: $0.14 against $0.74 per million tokens, 5.4 times less.
Which is better for agents and tool use, Qwen3.5-27B or GPT-5 nano?
GPT-5 nano ranks 53 of 164 models on sale for multi-step tasks with tools: support desks, coding agents, function calls, against 145 for Qwen3.5-27B.
Which is better for reasoning and knowledge, Qwen3.5-27B or GPT-5 nano?
Qwen3.5-27B ranks 82 of 198 models on sale for hard questions across science, maths and general knowledge, against 134 for GPT-5 nano.
Which is better for writing, Qwen3.5-27B or GPT-5 nano?
Qwen3.5-27B ranks 98 of 188 models on sale for what people prefer in blind comparisons, and judged writing quality, against 151 for GPT-5 nano.
Which is better for sticking to the facts, Qwen3.5-27B or GPT-5 nano?
Qwen3.5-27B ranks 121 of 152 models on sale for summarising without inventing things, and factual answers, against 125 for GPT-5 nano.
Which has the bigger context window, Qwen3.5-27B or GPT-5 nano?
GPT-5 nano: 400,000 tokens, against 262,144 for Qwen3.5-27B.
Run Qwen3.5-27B and GPT-5 nano on your own prompt
Benchmarks aren't your data. Try both side by side in the playground, with the cost of every answer.