| Signal | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 | Delta | UI-TARS 7B |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 83 | +50 | |
Pricing | 2 | +1 | |
Context window size | 95 | +14 | |
Recency | 100 | +12 | |
Output Capacity | 80 | +25 | |
| Overall Result | 5 wins | of 5 | 0 wins |
30
days ranked higher
0
days
0
days ranked higher
Alibaba
ByteDance
UI-TARS 7B saves you $84.00/month
That's $1008.00/year compared to Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
| Metric | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 | UI-TARS 7B | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 85 | 63 | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 |
| Rank | #30 | #206 | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 |
| Quality Rank | #30 | #206 | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 |
| Adoption Rank | #30 | #206 | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 |
| Parameters | -- | 7B | -- |
| Context Window | 1000K | 128K | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 |
| Pricing | $0.26/$1.56/M | $0.10/$0.20/M | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 83 | 33 | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 |
| Pricing | 2 | 0 | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 |
| Context window size | 95 | 81 | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 |
| Recency | 100 | 89 | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 |
| Output Capacity | 80 | 55 | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 |
Our composite score (0–100) combines six weighted signals: benchmark performance (25%), pricing efficiency (25%), context window size (15%), model recency (15%), output capacity (10%), and capability versatility (10%). Here's what the scores mean for these two models:
Scores 85/100 (rank #30), placing it in the top 90% of all 290 models tracked.
Scores 63/100 (rank #206), placing it in the top 29% of all 290 models tracked.
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 has a 22-point advantage, which typically translates to noticeably stronger performance on complex reasoning, code generation, and multi-step tasks.
UI-TARS 7B offers 84% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $4.50/month with UI-TARS 7B vs $27.30/month with Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 - a $22.80 monthly difference.
Both models have comparable response speeds. For most applications, the latency difference is negligible.
When latency matters most: Interactive chatbots, IDE code completion, real-time translation, and user-facing applications where response time directly impacts experience. For batch processing, background summarization, or offline analysis, latency is less critical.
Code generation & review
Higher benchmark score (0/100) indicates stronger performance on coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring
Customer support chatbot
Faster response time (speed score 0/100) is critical for user-facing chat. UI-TARS 7B also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support
Long document analysis
Larger context window (1000K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass
Batch data extraction
Lower output pricing ($0.20/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily
Creative writing & content
Higher overall composite score (85/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content
Image understanding & OCR
Supports vision input - can analyze screenshots, diagrams, photos, and scanned documents directly
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 clearly outperforms UI-TARS 7B with a significant 22.299999999999997-point lead. For most general use cases, Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 is the stronger choice. However, UI-TARS 7B may still excel in niche scenarios.
Best for Quality
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
UI-TARS 7B
84% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by Alibaba
| Capability | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 | UI-TARS 7B |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (Image Input) | ||
| Function Callingdiffers | ||
| Streaming | ||
| JSON Modediffers | ||
| Reasoningdiffers | ||
| Web Search | ||
| Image Output |
Alibaba
ByteDance
UI-TARS 7B saves you $1.92/month
That's 82% cheaper than Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 at 1,000 tokens/request and 100 requests/day.
Assumes 60% input / 40% output token ratio per request. Actual costs may vary based on your usage pattern.
| Parameter | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 | UI-TARS 7B |
|---|---|---|
| Context Window | 1M | 128K |
| Max Output Tokens | 65,536 | 2,048 |
| Open Source | No | Yes |
| Created | Feb 16, 2026 | Jul 22, 2025 |
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 scores 85/100 (rank #30) compared to UI-TARS 7B 's 63/100 (rank #206), giving it a 22-point advantage. Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 is the stronger overall choice, though UI-TARS 7B may excel in specific areas like cost efficiency.
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 is ranked #30 and UI-TARS 7B is ranked #206 out of 290+ AI models. Rankings use a composite score combining benchmark performance (25%), pricing (25%), context window (15%), recency (15%), output capacity (10%), and versatility (10%). Scores update hourly.
UI-TARS 7B is cheaper at $0.20/M output tokens vs Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15's $1.56/M output tokens - 7.8x more expensive. Input token pricing: Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 at $0.26/M vs UI-TARS 7B at $0.10/M.
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 has a larger context window of 1,000,000 tokens compared to UI-TARS 7B 's 128,000 tokens. A larger context window means the model can process longer documents and conversations.