Side-by-side comparison of pricing, 12 benchmarks, and generation speed.
| Metric | HyperNova 60B 2605 | Qwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Input ($/M tokens) | $0.04 | $0.03 |
| Output ($/M tokens) | $0.14 | $0.15 |
Data from Artificial Analysis API — 12 benchmarks
Qwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning) is cheaper overall. Its blended price (3:1 input/output ratio) is $0.06/M tokens vs $0.07/M for HyperNova 60B 2605.
HyperNova 60B 2605 wins 7 out of 12 benchmarks compared to 0 for Qwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning). See the detailed benchmark chart above for per-category results.
HyperNova 60B 2605 generates tokens faster at 360 tok/s vs 21 tok/s. However, Qwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning) has lower time-to-first-token (0.50s vs 0.59s).
Choose based on your priorities: Qwen3.5 4B (Non-reasoning) for lower cost, HyperNova 60B 2605 for stronger benchmark performance, and HyperNova 60B 2605 for faster generation. For latency-sensitive apps, check the TTFT comparison above.