Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 22 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

65/100
Margin
13.6pts
← winning
51.36/100
3 category wins2 category wins

Verified leaderboard positions: Claude Sonnet 4.6 #13; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B #31

BenchAlign evidence: Claude Sonnet 4.6 supported; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B estimated. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Claude Sonnet 4.6 and Qwen3.6-35B-A3B share 22 comparable benchmark results. 5 of 8 categories are comparable. 12 results are unique to Claude Sonnet 4.6; 36 to Qwen3.6-35B-A3B.

Updated July 15, 2026
Shared results
22
Claude Sonnet 4.6 only
12
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B only
36
Comparable categories
5 / 8

Pick Claude Sonnet 4.6 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3.6-35B-A3B only becomes the better choice if mathematics is the priority or you need the larger 262K context window.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 22 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 5 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

Claude Sonnet 4.6 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 76 to 59. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

Claude Sonnet 4.6's sharpest advantage is in knowledge, where it averages 66.2 against 51.8. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SuperGPQA, 95% to 64.7%. Qwen3.6-35B-A3B does hit back in mathematics, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B is the reasoning model in the pair, while Claude Sonnet 4.6 is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Qwen3.6-35B-A3B gives you the larger context window at 262K, compared with 200K for Claude Sonnet 4.6.

Category breakdown

Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.

Category scores and score margins for Claude Sonnet 4.6 and Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
CategoryClaude Sonnet 4.6ΔQwen3.6-35B-A3B
MathClaude Sonnet 4.626.4Margin→ 61.8Qwen3.6-35B-A3B88.2
KnowledgeClaude Sonnet 4.666.2Margin← 14.4Qwen3.6-35B-A3B51.8
AgenticClaude Sonnet 4.665.2Margin← 13.7Qwen3.6-35B-A3B51.5
CodingClaude Sonnet 4.669.1Margin→ 4.7Qwen3.6-35B-A3B73.8
MultimodalClaude Sonnet 4.677.4Margin← 1.1Qwen3.6-35B-A3B76.3

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · Claude Sonnet 4.6B · Qwen3.6-35B-A3B

  1. SuperGPQA

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 95%B 64.7%
    Winner: Claude Sonnet 4.6Δ 30.3
    SuperGPQA: Claude Sonnet 4.6 scored 95%; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B scored 64.7%. Claude Sonnet 4.6 wins this benchmark.

  2. HLE

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 49%B 21.4%
    Winner: Claude Sonnet 4.6Δ 27.6
    HLE: Claude Sonnet 4.6 scored 49%; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B scored 21.4%. Claude Sonnet 4.6 wins this benchmark.

  3. Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 59.1%B 51.5%
    Winner: Claude Sonnet 4.6Δ 7.6
    Terminal-Bench 2.0: Claude Sonnet 4.6 scored 59.1%; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B scored 51.5%. Claude Sonnet 4.6 wins this benchmark.

  4. SWE-bench Verified

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 79.6%B 73.4%
    Winner: Claude Sonnet 4.6Δ 6.2
    SWE-bench Verified: Claude Sonnet 4.6 scored 79.6%; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B scored 73.4%. Claude Sonnet 4.6 wins this benchmark.

  5. MMLU-Pro

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 79.2%B 85.2%
    Winner: Qwen3.6-35B-A3BΔ 6
    MMLU-Pro: Claude Sonnet 4.6 scored 79.2%; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B scored 85.2%. Qwen3.6-35B-A3B wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricClaude Sonnet 4.6Qwen3.6-35B-A3BComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude Sonnet 4.6$3 input / $15 outputQwen3.6-35B-A3BNot availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude Sonnet 4.644 tok/sQwen3.6-35B-A3BNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude Sonnet 4.61.48 sQwen3.6-35B-A3BNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude Sonnet 4.6200KQwen3.6-35B-A3B262KQwen3.6-35B-A3B lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticClaude Sonnet 4.6 wins
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.6Qwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 59.1%51.5%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 72.1%—Not comparable
Claw-EvalSource 67.8%68.7%Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads
CyberGymSource 65.2%—Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 79.5%95.3%Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads
Gert LabsSource 62.92%42.65%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
OSWorld 2.0Source 8.3%—Not comparable
JobBenchSource 36.9%—Not comparable
QwenClawBenchSource —52.6%Not comparable
QwenWebBenchSource —1397Not comparable
τ³-bench resultsSource —67.2%Not comparable
VITA-BenchSource —35.6%Not comparable
DeepPlanningSource —25.9%Not comparable
ToolathlonSource —26.9%Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource —62.8%Not comparable
WideResearchSource —60.1%Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource —21.4%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource —27.4%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource —1049Not comparable
CodingQwen3.6-35B-A3B wins
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.6Qwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 79.6%73.4%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
SWE-RebenchSource 60.7%—Not comparable
React Native EvalsSource 80.6%—Not comparable
Vibe Code BenchSource 51.48%—Not comparable
cursorBench31Source 48.8%—Not comparable
Terminal-Bench HardSource 46.2%34.8%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
AA-SciCodeSource 46.9%35.8%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
FrontierCodeSource 24.3%—Not comparable
SWE MultilingualSource —67.2%Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource —49.5%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source —51.5%Not comparable
LiveCodeBenchSource —80.4%Not comparable
NL2RepoSource —29.4%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource —41.9%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.6Qwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
AA-LCRSource 57.7%63.7%Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads
CritPtSource 0.9%0.3%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
KnowledgeClaude Sonnet 4.6 wins
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.6Qwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
GPQASource 89.9%86%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
SuperGPQASource 95%64.7%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
MMLU-ProSource 79.2%85.2%Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads
HLESource 49%21.4%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 35.9%31.6%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 79.9%84.1%Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads
AA-HLESource 13.2%20.2%Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -2.9%-21.4%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 38.0%18.9%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 65.9%49.7%Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads
C-EvalSource —90%Not comparable
MathQwen3.6-35B-A3B wins
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.6Qwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 32.400%—Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 8.300%—Not comparable
HMMT Feb 2025Source —90.7%Not comparable
HMMT Nov 2025Source —89.1%Not comparable
HMMT Feb 2026Source —83.6%Not comparable
MMAnswerBenchSource —78.9%Not comparable
AIME26Source —92.7%Not comparable
MultimodalClaude Sonnet 4.6 wins
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.6Qwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
CharXivSource 77.4%78%Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads
AA-MMMU-ProSource 70.6%75.0%Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1319—Not comparable
MMMUSource —81.7%Not comparable
MMMU-ProSource —75.3%Not comparable
RealWorldQASource —85.3%Not comparable
OmniDocBench 1.5Source —89.9%Not comparable
SimpleVQASource —58.9%Not comparable
CC-OCRSource —81.9%Not comparable
AI2D_TESTSource —92.7%Not comparable
RefCOCO (avg)Source —92.0%Not comparable
ODINW13Source —50.8%Not comparable
Video-MME (with subtitle)Source —86.6%Not comparable
Video-MME (w/o subtitle)Source —82.5%Not comparable
VideoMMMUSource —83.7%Not comparable
MLVU (M-Avg)Source —86.2%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.6Qwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
AA-IFBenchSource 41.2%64.4%Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads
Frequently Asked Questions (6)

Which is better, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?

Claude Sonnet 4.6 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 76 to 59. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SuperGPQA, where the scores are 95% and 64.7%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?

Claude Sonnet 4.6 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 66.2 versus 51.8. Inside this category, SuperGPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for coding, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 73.8 versus 69.1. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench Hard is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for math, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 88.2 versus 26.4. Claude Sonnet 4.6 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?

Claude Sonnet 4.6 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 65.2 versus 51.5. Inside this category, Gert Labs is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?

Claude Sonnet 4.6 has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 77.4 versus 76.3. Inside this category, AA-MMMU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Explore More

Anthropic Compare Pricing Methodology Find Your Best LLM Overall Rankings
Last updated: July 15, 2026

The AI models change fast. We track them for you.

A weekly brief for engineers and researchers covering new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.

Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.