Side-by-side comparison of pricing, 12 benchmarks, and generation speed.
| Metric | Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning) | Apodex 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Input ($/M tokens) | $0.4 | $0.3 |
| Output ($/M tokens) | $3.2 | $3 |
Verdict. Apodex 1.1 takes the aggregate benchmark matchup 2–0 across 2 categories. Real workloads usually care about a handful of specific tasks — see the per-benchmark table above.
Pricing. Both models sit in the budget bracket for output-token pricing. At 1.1× the per-million-token cost, Apodex 1.1 is meaningfully cheaper if your traffic is output-heavy (long completions, document generation, agent loops). Apodex 1.1 makes more sense when output volume is low and absolute reasoning quality justifies the premium.
Strengths. Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning) is strongest on Coding Index (43.3), Intelligence Index (28.2). Apodex 1.1 leads on Coding Index (60.8), Intelligence Index (44.0).
Speed. Speed data is incomplete for this pair; benchmark and price should decide.
Provider. Alibaba and Apodex sell to overlapping but distinct developer audiences: Alibaba tends to ship frontier reasoning models with premium positioning, while Apodex often prices more aggressively. Your existing vendor relationships, billing, and SLA preferences may matter as much as the raw numbers above.
Workload cost. Workload scenarios (per million requests at 30M input + 15M output tokens): Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning) costs $60.00 ($720/year); Apodex 1.1 costs $54.00 ($648/year). At a smaller 5M-input/2M-output scale (single-developer tool or prototype): Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning) ≈ $8.40/run, Apodex 1.1 ≈ $7.50/run. At agent/realtime scale (200M input / 100M output per million requests): Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning) ≈ $400/run, Apodex 1.1 ≈ $360/run. Apodex 1.1 becomes more attractive at higher volume — the absolute per-token pricing difference compounds when you ship at scale.
Recommendation. Both models have legitimate use cases — the right answer depends on whether you are optimizing for benchmark ceiling, latency, or unit cost. Start with the cheaper / faster model, evaluate against your specific task, and only switch if the upgrade shows a meaningful lift.
Data from Artificial Analysis API — 12 benchmarks
Apodex 1.1 is cheaper overall. Its blended price (3:1 input/output ratio) is $0.97/M tokens vs $1.10/M for Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning).
Apodex 1.1 wins 2 out of 12 benchmarks compared to 0 for Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning). See the detailed benchmark chart above for per-category results.
Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning) generates tokens faster at 144 tok/s vs — tok/s. Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning) also has lower time-to-first-token (2.32s vs —s).
Choose based on your priorities: Apodex 1.1 for lower cost, Apodex 1.1 for stronger benchmark performance, and Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning) for faster generation. For latency-sensitive apps, check the TTFT comparison above.