DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning) vs Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning)
Which is better for the money: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning) by DeepSeek or Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning) by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.
Clear winner
Verdict
Pick DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning)
Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning) vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning): 54.7% less intelligence, 37.7% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 1537.2% slower end-to-end.
| Metric | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning) | Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 24.7 | 11.2 | −54.7% Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning) is 54.7% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $238.91 | $328.86 | +37.7% Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning) is 37.7% more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 2.82s | 46.17s | +1537.2% Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning) is 1537.2% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $1.20 | $0.14 / $0.20 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image, Video |
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
- Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning)Qwen3.5 9B (Reasoning)Today's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/deepseek-v4-1-flash-non-reasoning/qwen3-5-9b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/deepseek-v4-1-flash-non-reasoning/qwen3-5-9b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill