Skip to main content

Model comparison

DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 26 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

53.95/100
Margin
2.5pts
← winning
51.47/100
3 category wins1 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) #92 (Estimated); Qwen3.6-35B-A3B #104 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) and Qwen3.6-35B-A3B share 26 comparable benchmark results. 4 of 8 categories are comparable. 12 results are unique to DeepSeek V4 Flash (High); 31 to Qwen3.6-35B-A3B.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
26
DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) only
12
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B only
31
Comparable categories
4 / 8

Pick DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3.6-35B-A3B only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 26 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 4 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) has the cleaner BenchAlign overall profile here, landing at 53.95 versus 51.47. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.

DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)'s sharpest advantage is in agentic, where it averages 55.3 against 51.5. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is HMMT Feb 2026, 91.9% to 83.6%. Qwen3.6-35B-A3B does hit back in coding, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.

DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 262K for Qwen3.6-35B-A3B.

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 DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) and Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
CategoryDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)ΔQwen3.6-35B-A3B
CodingDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)68.5Margin 5.3Qwen3.6-35B-A3B73.8
AgenticDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)55.3Margin 3.8Qwen3.6-35B-A3B51.5
MathDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)91.9Margin 3.7Qwen3.6-35B-A3B88.2
KnowledgeDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)52.1Margin 0.7Qwen3.6-35B-A3B51.4
MultimodalDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Not measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.6-35B-A3B76.3

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)B · Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
  1. HMMT Feb 2026

    Math
    Source ↗
    A 91.9%B 83.6%
    Winner: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Δ 8.3
    HMMT Feb 2026: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) scored 91.9%; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B scored 83.6%. DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) wins this benchmark.
  2. HLE

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 29.4%B 21.4%
    Winner: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Δ 8
    HLE: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) scored 29.4%; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B scored 21.4%. DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) wins this benchmark.
  3. SWE-bench Verified

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 78.6%B 73.4%
    Winner: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Δ 5.2
    SWE-bench Verified: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) scored 78.6%; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B scored 73.4%. DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) wins this benchmark.
  4. Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 56.6%B 51.5%
    Winner: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Δ 5.1
    Terminal-Bench 2.0: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) scored 56.6%; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B scored 51.5%. DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) wins this benchmark.
  5. SWE-bench Pro

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 52.3%B 49.5%
    Winner: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Δ 2.8
    SWE-bench Pro: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) scored 52.3%; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B scored 49.5%. DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Qwen3.6-35B-A3BComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)$0.14 input / $0.28 outputQwen3.6-35B-A3BNot availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Not availableQwen3.6-35B-A3BNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Not availableQwen3.6-35B-A3BNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)1MQwen3.6-35B-A3B262KDeepSeek V4 Flash (High) lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticDeepSeek V4 Flash (High) wins
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Qwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 56.6%51.5%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
BrowseCompSource 53.5%Not comparable
HLE w/ toolsSource 40.3%Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource 67.4%62.8%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
ToolathlonSource 43.5%26.9%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
τ²-bench resultsSource 95.6%95.3%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
AA Agentic IndexSource 28.2%21.4%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
GDPval-AASource 32.4%27.4%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
GDPval-AASource 11471049DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
Claw-EvalSource 68.7%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
WideResearchSource 60.1%Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 42.65%Not comparable
CodingQwen3.6-35B-A3B wins
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Qwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
CodeforcesSource 2816.0Not comparable
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 78.6%73.4%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
SWE-bench ProSource 52.3%49.5%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
SWE MultilingualSource 70.2%67.2%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 56.6%51.5%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
AA-SciCodeSource 42.0%35.8%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
AA Coding IndexSource 52.0%41.9%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
LiveCodeBenchSource 80.4%Not comparable
NL2RepoSource 29.4%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Qwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
MRCR 1MSource 76.9%Not comparable
CorpusQA 1MSource 59.3%Not comparable
AA-LCRSource 62.7%63.7%Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads
CritPtSource 3.4%0.3%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
KnowledgeDeepSeek V4 Flash (High) wins
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Qwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
MMLU-ProSource 86.4%85.2%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
SimpleQASource 28.9%Not comparable
Chinese-SimpleQASource 73.2%Not comparable
GPQASource 87.4%86%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
GPQA-DSource 87.4%Not comparable
HLESource 29.4%21.4%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 37.5%31.6%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 86.7%84.1%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
AA-HLESource 27.8%20.2%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -22.3%-21.4%Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 35.5%18.9%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 89.7%49.7%Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads
SuperGPQASource 64.7%Not comparable
C-EvalSource 90%Not comparable
MathDeepSeek V4 Flash (High) wins
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Qwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
HMMT Feb 2026Source 91.9%83.6%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
IMOAnswerBenchSource 85.1%Not comparable
ApexSource 19.1%Not comparable
Apex ShortlistSource 72.1%Not comparable
HMMT Feb 2025Source 90.7%Not comparable
HMMT Nov 2025Source 89.1%Not comparable
MMAnswerBenchSource 78.9%Not comparable
AIME26Source 92.7%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Qwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1238Not comparable
MMMUSource 81.7%Not comparable
MMMU-ProSource 75.3%Not comparable
RealWorldQASource 85.3%Not comparable
OmniDocBench 1.5Source 89.9%Not comparable
CharXivSource 78%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
AA-MMMU-ProSource 75.0%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Qwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
AA-IFBenchSource 73.5%64.4%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
Frequently Asked Questions (5)

Which is better, DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?

DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 53.95 to 51.47. The biggest single separator in this matchup is HMMT Feb 2026, where the scores are 91.9% and 83.6%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?

DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 52.1 versus 51.4. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Hallucination Rate is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for coding, DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 73.8 versus 68.5. Inside this category, AA Coding Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for math, DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?

DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 91.9 versus 88.2. Inside this category, HMMT Feb 2026 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for agentic tasks, DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?

DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 55.3 versus 51.5. Inside this category, GDPval-AA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 23, 2026

Choose a model with this week’s evidence

Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.

One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.