Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Reasoning) vs Ring-2.6-1T
Which is better for the money: Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Reasoning) by Alibaba or Ring-2.6-1T by InclusionAI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.
Clear winner
Verdict
Pick Ring-2.6-1T
Ring-2.6-1T vs Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Reasoning): 6.4% more intelligence, 13.0% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 13.9% slower end-to-end.
| Metric | Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Reasoning) | Ring-2.6-1T | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 15.6 | 16.6 | +6.4% Ring-2.6-1T is 6.4% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $661.29 | $575.60 | −13.0% Ring-2.6-1T is 13.0% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 21.22s | 24.17s | +13.9% Ring-2.6-1T is 13.9% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.40 / $3.20 | $0.30 / $2.50 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (High) scores 50.20 for $521.
- Ring-2.6-1T is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (High) scores 50.20 for $521.
Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Reasoning)Ring-2.6-1TToday'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/qwen3-5-122b-a10b/ring-2-6-1t · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/qwen3-5-122b-a10b/ring-2-6-1t?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill