StepFun Step 3.5 Flash vs Augment Code Intent
Which one should you pick? Here's the full breakdown.
StepFun Step 3.5 Flash
StepFun's (China) agent-focused open-weight model -- Step 3.5 Flash launched 2026-02-01. 196B sparse MoE, ~11B active. Benchmarks slightly ahead of DeepSeek V3.2 at over 3x smaller total size. Step 3 (321B / 38B active, Apache 2.0) and Step3-VL-10B multimodal also in the family
Augment Code Intent
Spec-driven multi-agent orchestration for code -- coordinator + implementor agents in isolated git worktrees + verifier. Works with Augment's Auggie, Claude Code, Codex, and OpenCode. Public beta 2026-02-10
| Category | StepFun Step 3.5 Flash | Augment Code Intent |
|---|---|---|
| Ease of Use | 6.0 | 7.0 |
| Output Quality | 8.0 | 8.0 |
| Value | 9.0 | 8.0 |
| Features | 8.0 | 9.0 |
| Overall | 7.8 | 8.0 |
Pricing Comparison
| Feature | StepFun Step 3.5 Flash | Augment Code Intent |
|---|---|---|
| Free Tier | Yes | No |
| Starting Price | $0 | Included in Auggie subscription |
Which Should You Pick?
Pick StepFun Step 3.5 Flash if...
- ✓Better value for money (9/10)
- ✓Has a free tier
Teams building agent systems on Chinese open-weight foundations who want something other than DeepSeek or Qwen, especially if agentic tool-use is the primary workload. Also good for Chinese-market products where StepFun's domestic tuning advantages matter. And for anyone looking to add diversity to their open-weight evaluation matrix beyond the top-3 Chinese labs.
Visit StepFun Step 3.5 FlashPick Augment Code Intent if...
- ✓Easier to use (7 vs 6)
- ✓More features (9 vs 8)
Engineering teams already using Augment Code's Auggie or running mixed Claude-Code + Codex workflows who want higher-level orchestration than writing LangGraph graphs from scratch. Also teams that want git-worktree-isolated parallel agent work with a verifier in the loop.
Visit Augment Code IntentOur Verdict
StepFun Step 3.5 Flash and Augment Code Intent are extremely close overall. Your choice comes down to specific needs -- StepFun Step 3.5 Flash is better for teams building agent systems on chinese open-weight foundations who want something other than deepseek or qwen, especially if agentic tool-use is the primary workload, while Augment Code Intent works best for engineering teams already using augment code's auggie or running mixed claude-code + codex workflows who want higher-level orchestration than writing langgraph graphs from scratch.