Side-by-side benchmark comparison across agentic, coding, multimodal, knowledge, reasoning, and math workflows.
DeepSeekMath V2
63
3/8 categoriesQwen3.6 Plus
69
Winner · 4/8 categoriesDeepSeekMath V2· Qwen3.6 Plus
Pick Qwen3.6 Plus if you want the stronger benchmark profile. DeepSeekMath V2 only becomes the better choice if reasoning is the priority.
Qwen3.6 Plus is clearly ahead on the aggregate, 69 to 63. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Qwen3.6 Plus's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 64.9 against 46.9. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Verified, 45% to 78.8%. DeepSeekMath V2 does hit back in reasoning, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
Qwen3.6 Plus gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 128K for DeepSeekMath V2.
BenchLM keeps the benchmark table and the operator tradeoffs on the same page so a better score does not hide a materially slower, pricier, or smaller-context model.
Runtime metrics show N/A when BenchLM does not have a sourced snapshot for that exact model. The scoring rules and freshness policy are documented on the methodology page.
| Benchmark | DeepSeekMath V2 | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| AgenticDeepSeekMath V2 wins | ||
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | 65% | 61.6% |
| BrowseComp | 66% | — |
| OSWorld-Verified | 61% | 62.5% |
| Claw-Eval | — | 58.7% |
| QwenClawBench | — | 57.2% |
| QwenWebBench | — | 1502 |
| TAU3-Bench | — | 70.7% |
| VITA-Bench | — | 44.3% |
| DeepPlanning | — | 41.5% |
| Toolathlon | — | 39.8% |
| MCP Atlas | — | 48.2% |
| MCP-Tasks | — | 74.1% |
| WideResearch | — | 74.3% |
| CodingQwen3.6 Plus wins | ||
| HumanEval | 72% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified | 45% | 78.8% |
| LiveCodeBench | 44% | — |
| SWE-bench Pro | 51% | 56.6% |
| SWE Multilingual | — | 73.8% |
| LiveCodeBench v6 | — | 87.1% |
| NL2Repo | — | 37.9% |
| Multimodal & GroundedQwen3.6 Plus wins | ||
| MMMU-Pro | 64% | 78.8% |
| OfficeQA Pro | 73% | — |
| MMMU | — | 86.0% |
| RealWorldQA | — | 85.4% |
| OmniDocBench 1.5 | — | 91.2% |
| Video-MME (with subtitle) | — | 87.8% |
| Video-MME (w/o subtitle) | — | 84.2% |
| MathVision | — | 88.0% |
| We-Math | — | 89.0% |
| DynaMath | — | 88.0% |
| MStar | — | 83.3% |
| SimpleVQA | — | 67.3% |
| ChatCVQA | — | 81.5% |
| MMLongBench-Doc | — | 62.0% |
| CC-OCR | — | 83.4% |
| AI2D_TEST | — | 94.4% |
| CountBench | — | 97.6% |
| RefCOCO (avg) | — | 93.5% |
| ODINW13 | — | 51.8% |
| ERQA | — | 65.7% |
| VideoMMMU | — | 84.0% |
| MLVU (M-Avg) | — | 86.7% |
| ScreenSpot Pro | — | 68.2% |
| ReasoningDeepSeekMath V2 wins | ||
| MuSR | 75% | — |
| BBH | 86% | — |
| LongBench v2 | 75% | 62% |
| MRCRv2 | 72% | — |
| AI-Needle | — | 68.3% |
| KnowledgeDeepSeekMath V2 wins | ||
| GPQA | 79% | 90.4% |
| SuperGPQA | 77% | 71.6% |
| FrontierScience | 73% | — |
| SimpleQA | 77% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 88.5% |
| MMLU-Redux | — | 94.5% |
| C-Eval | — | 93.3% |
| HLE | — | 28.8% |
| Instruction FollowingQwen3.6 Plus wins | ||
| IFEval | 83% | 94.3% |
| IFBench | — | 74.2% |
| MultilingualQwen3.6 Plus wins | ||
| MGSM | 87% | — |
| MMLU-ProX | 80% | 84.7% |
| NOVA-63 | — | 57.9% |
| INCLUDE | — | 85.1% |
| PolyMath | — | 77.4% |
| VWT2k-lite | — | 84.3% |
| MAXIFE | — | 88.2% |
| Mathematics | ||
| AIME 2024 | 82% | — |
| AIME 2025 | 81% | — |
| HMMT Feb 2023 | 76% | — |
| HMMT Feb 2024 | 78% | — |
| HMMT Feb 2025 | 77% | — |
| BRUMO 2025 | 79% | — |
| MATH-500 | 90% | — |
| AIME26 | — | 95.3% |
| HMMT Feb 2025 | — | 96.7% |
| HMMT Nov 2025 | — | 94.6% |
| HMMT Feb 2026 | — | 87.8% |
| MMAnswerBench | — | 83.8% |
Qwen3.6 Plus is ahead overall, 69 to 63. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 45% and 78.8%.
DeepSeekMath V2 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 76.1 versus 66. Inside this category, GPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Qwen3.6 Plus has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 64.9 versus 46.9. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
DeepSeekMath V2 has the edge for reasoning in this comparison, averaging 74 versus 62. Inside this category, LongBench v2 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
DeepSeekMath V2 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 63.9 versus 62. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Qwen3.6 Plus has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 78.8 versus 68.1. Inside this category, MMMU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Qwen3.6 Plus has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 94.3 versus 83. Inside this category, IFEval is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Qwen3.6 Plus has the edge for multilingual tasks in this comparison, averaging 84.7 versus 82.5. Inside this category, MMLU-ProX is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Get notified when new models drop, benchmark scores change, or the leaderboard shifts. One email per week.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime. We only store derived location metadata for consent routing.