llmrun

Qwen3.5 27B — Benchmarks

Benchmark scores for Qwen3.5 27B aggregated from public leaderboards (8 boards), with how it ranks among open models and how it compares with its nearest neighbours. See hardware requirements for what you need to run it.

llmrun Composite Score →

103.8

90% range 97.9–109.6 · from 6 boards

Qwen3.5 27B reasoning benchmarks

Multi-step logic and problem-solving — can the model think through a hard problem rather than recall an answer.

  • DTBench

    82.4%

    median 68.7%open leader 93.9%

    Overall best: Claude Opus 5.5 Max 98.9%

    71st percentile · #21 of 70 open · #124 of 235 all

    Lab-reported

    Epoch AI ·

  • LMCA

    34.0%

    median 25.5%open leader 55.5%

    Overall best: Claude Sonnet 5.5 Max 68.3%

    71st percentile · #17 of 56 open · #131 of 197 all

    Lab-reported

    Epoch AI ·

  • Vending-Bench 2

    202.0

    median 2376.8open leader 8313.8

    Overall best: Gemini 4 Carbon (unspecified) 16484.2

    25th percentile · #13 of 17 open · #63 of 71 all

    Lab-reported

    Epoch AI ·

Qwen3.5 27B coding benchmarks

Writing, editing, and fixing real code — measured by whether the resulting program actually runs and passes tests.

  • WeirdML

    39.5%

    median 39.5%open leader 82.6%

    Overall best: GPT 6 Astra Promax 93.6%

    50th percentile · #24 of 47 open · #109 of 162 all

    Independent

    Epoch AI ·

  • ALE-Bench

    349.4

    median 754.6open leader 1932.8

    Overall best: GPT 6 Astra Max 2951.3

    15th percentile · #41 of 48 open · #115 of 129 all

    Lab-reported

    Epoch AI ·

Other results (1)

Leaderboard-only, not part of the llmrun Score

  • LMArena WebDev

    1358.3

    median 1415.2open leader 1665.0

    Overall best: Claude Opus 5.5 (Max) 1809.8

    30th percentile · #39 of 55 open · #114 of 146 all

    Arena

    Arena ·

Qwen3.5 27B knowledge benchmarks

Breadth and depth of factual knowledge across many subjects, paired with the reasoning to apply it.

  • MMLU-Pro

    86.1%

    median 52.0%open leader 88.0%

    Overall best: Gemini-3.1-Pro 91.2%

    97th percentile · #5 of 146 open · #28 of 257 all

    Independent

    TIGER-Lab

Qwen3.5 27B instruction following benchmarks

How precisely a model obeys explicit, verifiable instructions — format, length, and content constraints — and, more broadly, how much people prefer its responses head-to-head in blind human voting.

  • LMArena Text

    1408.8

    median 1321.4open leader 1488.2

    Overall best: Gemini 4 Carbon (High) 1527.5

    76th percentile · #45 of 188 open · #148 of 408 all

    Arena

    Arena ·

Score vs VRAM in the 24 GB tier

  • Qwen3.5 27B
  • Other models
  • Best Score for its VRAM

#7 of 36 that fit 24 GB

Each dot is a model at the best quant that fits a 24 GB GPU. The line steps up to the best Score available at each amount of VRAM; a dot below it is beaten by a model that needs no more memory.

Full 24 GB ranking →

Qwen3.5 27B vs its neighbours

Same boards for the nearest open models per llmrun Score and the best model that fits 24 GB. The highest score in each row is marked.

BoardQwen3.5 27Bthis modelQwen3.8 27Bbest in classQ4_K_M · 18 GBGemma 4 26B A4B ITnearest by ScoreQ4_K_M · 17 GBQwen3.5 35B A3Bnearest by ScoreQ4_K_M · 22 GBSeed OSS 36B Instructnearest by ScoreQ4_K_S · 23 GB
llmrun Score103.8122.0105.8105.8102.5
DTBench82.4%88.0%74.9%80.0%—
LMCA34.0%41.4%29.7%29.5%—
WeirdML39.5%—35.2%——
ALE-Bench349.4—927.2——
MMLU-Pro86.1%——85.3%82.7%
LMArena Text1408.81435.61437.61393.8—
Compare head to headCompareCompareCompareCompare

Scores aggregated from public benchmark sources (Epoch AI: 5 boards, Arena: 2 boards, TIGER-Lab: 1 board) — each linked from the benchmark pages. llmrun does not run these benchmarks. Percentiles and ranks are among open models in the llmrun catalogue; the median and leader marks refer to the same field.