Skip to content
ModelCap

Head-to-head comparison

Laguna S 2.1 vs Qwen3.5 397B A17B

Laguna S 2.1 (Poolside) and Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Qwen) compared on the ModelCap Index, API price, context window, provider availability, weight access and every public benchmark board they share. Figures are the same ones shown on the live rankings; nothing here is a hidden score.

Snapshot as of 9 September 2026

As of 9 September 2026, Qwen3.5 397B A17B holds the stronger ModelCap Index position (#39 vs #40); Laguna S 2.1 is 19.4× cheaper per output token ($0.18/1M vs $3.50/1M); Laguna S 2.1 offers the longer context window (1M vs 262K tokens); and Qwen3.5 397B A17B ships open weights.

Which should you choose?

Choose Laguna S 2.1 if…

  • API cost matters — $0.18/1M output tokens against $3.50/1M, about 19.4× cheaper.
  • your workload is prompt-heavy — input tokens cost $0.09/1M against $0.55/1M.
  • you need the longer context window — 1M tokens against 262K.
  • you want the more recently listed model — Laguna S 2.1 was listed 21 July 2026, Qwen3.5 397B A17B 16 February 2026.

Choose Qwen3.5 397B A17B if…

  • you want the stronger overall ModelCap Index position — #39 against #40 (63.4 vs 63.3 points).
  • you want to self-host: Qwen3.5 397B A17B ships open weights while Laguna S 2.1 is restricted license.
  • you want provider choice — 10 listed API providers against 1.

Laguna S 2.1 vs Qwen3.5 397B A17B: specs, pricing and context

Specification comparison of Laguna S 2.1 and Qwen3.5 397B A17B
FieldLaguna S 2.1PoolsideQwen3.5 397B A17BQwen
ModelCap Index position#40#39
Index score63.363.4
EvidenceEstimatedMeasured
Input price / 1M tokens$0.09$0.55
Output price / 1M tokens$0.18$3.50
Context window1M tokens262K tokens
Max output tokens131K236K
API providers listed110
Weight accessRestricted licenseOpen weights
Input modalitiesTextText, Image, Video
First listed21 July 202616 February 2026
PublisherPoolsideQwen

Evidence: 5 reported rows against measured corpus ladders (67%); global-corpus-prior over 182 held-out anchors (33%); shrunk 4.8 toward the measured corpus · 3 public benchmark observations across 3 boards. Prices are the lowest listed API offer per million tokens observed on the OpenRouter catalogue.

Benchmark scores: Laguna S 2.1 vs Qwen3.5 397B A17B

Public benchmark boards where Laguna S 2.1 or Qwen3.5 397B A17B has a published result
BoardLaguna S 2.1Qwen3.5 397B A17BLeads
Arena codingArena (LMArena)—14911486–1496Only one result
AA Intelligence IndexArtificial Analysis—19.1intelligence-index:v4.3:reasoning-unspecifiedOnly one result
AA Terminal-Bench 2.1Artificial Analysis—51.3%terminal-bench:2.1:terminus-2:e2b:pass-at-1:3-repeats:source-model="Qwen3.5 397B A17B":reasoning=trueOnly one result
AA τ²-Bench TelecomArtificial Analysis—95.6%tau2:telecom:dual-control:pass-at-1:3-repeats:source-model="Qwen3.5 397B A17B":reasoning=trueOnly one result
AA Humanity's Last ExamArtificial Analysis—29.0%hle:may-2025:text-only-2158:no-tools:pass-at-1:source-model="Qwen3.5 397B A17B":reasoning=trueOnly one result

Scores are the sources' own published figures for each model's best evaluated configuration; ModelCap never re-runs a benchmark.

Want a different pairing? Open the interactive comparison tool to swap either model for any current ranked language model.

Laguna S 2.1 vs Qwen3.5 397B A17B: common questions

Is Laguna S 2.1 better than Qwen3.5 397B A17B?

Qwen3.5 397B A17B ranks higher on the ModelCap Index as of 9 September 2026: #39 against #40. That is a capability ranking built from public benchmark evidence with published uncertainty; whether it is "better" for you also depends on price, context and where you can run it. Their published uncertainty intervals overlap, so the rank difference alone does not establish a reliable capability advantage for your workload.

Is Laguna S 2.1 cheaper than Qwen3.5 397B A17B?

Laguna S 2.1 is cheaper on output tokens: $0.18/1M against $3.50/1M. Input tokens are $0.09/1M for Laguna S 2.1 and $0.55/1M for Qwen3.5 397B A17B. Prices are the lowest listed API offer ModelCap observed, in USD per million tokens. For 1,000 requests with 2,000 input and 500 output tokens each (2M input + 0.5M output), the listed-rate estimate is $0.27 for Laguna S 2.1 versus $2.85 for Qwen3.5 397B A17B. Laguna S 2.1 costs 90.5% less in this scenario. This excludes caching, batch discounts, prompt-length tiers, tool charges and retries; verify the selected endpoint before budgeting.

Which has the bigger context window, Laguna S 2.1 or Qwen3.5 397B A17B?

Laguna S 2.1 has the larger context window: 1M tokens against 262K.

Which is better for coding, Laguna S 2.1 or Qwen3.5 397B A17B?

The two models do not share a coding benchmark board on ModelCap yet, so no head-to-head coding score is published; the ModelCap Index position is the closest overall signal.

Are Laguna S 2.1 and Qwen3.5 397B A17B open-weight models?

Laguna S 2.1: Restricted license. Qwen3.5 397B A17B: Open weights. Open weights mean the checkpoint can be downloaded and self-hosted under its licence; API-only models are available solely through hosted endpoints.

Where can I run Laguna S 2.1 and Qwen3.5 397B A17B?

ModelCap currently lists 1 API provider for Laguna S 2.1 and 10 for Qwen3.5 397B A17B, from the OpenRouter catalogue snapshot the site serves; each model page lists the providers and their prices.

How current is this Laguna S 2.1 vs Qwen3.5 397B A17B comparison?

Every figure comes from the sealed ModelCap dataset published 9 September 2026; the page re-renders within a minute of each data refresh, and the ModelCap Index positions are the same ones shown on the live rankings.

Explore further