uttapen

Qwen3.5-9B vs Qwen3.7 Flash

Both sit behind the same key and the same code on uttapen — the only thing that changes is the model string, so you can run each of them against your own workload without touching anything else. On cost, Qwen3.7 Flash comes out about 1.6× cheaper.

FeatureQwen3.5-9BQwen3.7 Flash
ProviderQwen (Alibaba)Qwen (Alibaba)
Model idqwen/qwen3.5-9bqwen/qwen3.7-flash
Context262,144 tokens1,000,000 tokens
Max output235,929 tokens65,536 tokens
Input / 1M tokens29,013 toman8,704 toman
Output / 1M tokens43,519 toman37,716 toman
≈ one 1,000-word request94 toman60 toman
Input cachingNo1,741 toman / 1M
Image inputYesYes
File inputNoNo
Tool callingYesYes
JSON outputYesYes
Reasoning modeYesYes

Which one for what?

Qwen3.5-9B

  • Multi-step problems, maths, and tracking down a bug
  • Whole documents or a codebase in a single request
  • Reading screenshots, invoices, and scanned forms
  • Agents that call your own APIs and database
  • High-volume work where cost per call decides
94 toman per 1,000 words · Model page

Qwen3.7 Flash

  • Multi-step problems, maths, and tracking down a bug
  • Whole documents or a codebase in a single request
  • Reading screenshots, invoices, and scanned forms
  • Agents that call your own APIs and database
  • High-volume work where cost per call decides
60 toman per 1,000 words · Model page

Run both with the same code

Swap the model value between the two ids and send the same request twice; what each answer cost comes back in the X-Uttapen-Cost-Toman header.

curl https://api.uttapen.ir/v1/chat/completions \
  -H "Authorization: Bearer sk-up-…" \
  -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
  -d '{
    "model": "qwen/qwen3.5-9b",
    "messages": [{"role": "user", "content": "Introduce yourself in one sentence."}],
    "stream": true
  }'

model = "qwen/qwen3.7-flash"

More comparisons: all pairs · model rankings · full catalogue

base_url = https://api.uttapen.ir/v1