Model comparison
Exaone 4.0 32B vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
Head-to-head evidence from 13 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Verified leaderboard positions: Exaone 4.0 32B unranked; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B #31
BenchAlign evidence: Exaone 4.0 32B estimated; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B estimated. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Exaone 4.0 32B and Qwen3.6-35B-A3B share 13 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 1 result is unique to Exaone 4.0 32B; 45 to Qwen3.6-35B-A3B.
Updated July 15, 2026- Shared results
- 13
- Exaone 4.0 32B only
- 1
- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B only
- 45
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick Qwen3.6-35B-A3B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Exaone 4.0 32B only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 13 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 59 to 51. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B gives you the larger context window at 262K, compared with 128K for Exaone 4.0 32B.
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 | Exaone 4.0 32B | Δ | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | Exaone 4.0 32B81.8 | Margin← 30.0 | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B51.8 |
| Agentic | Exaone 4.0 32BNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B51.5 |
| Coding | Exaone 4.0 32BNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B73.8 |
| Math | Exaone 4.0 32BNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B88.2 |
| Multimodal | Exaone 4.0 32BNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B76.3 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
MMLU-Pro
KnowledgeA 81.8%B 85.2%Winner: Qwen3.6-35B-A3BΔ 3.4MMLU-Pro: Exaone 4.0 32B scored 81.8%; 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.
| Metric | Exaone 4.0 32B | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Exaone 4.0 32BNot available | Qwen3.6-35B-A3BNot available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Exaone 4.0 32BNot available | Qwen3.6-35B-A3BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Exaone 4.0 32BNot available | Qwen3.6-35B-A3BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Exaone 4.0 32B128K | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B262K | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic15 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Exaone 4.0 32B | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 4.1% | 95.3% | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 51.5% | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | — | 68.7% | Not comparable |
| QwenClawBenchSource | — | 52.6% | Not comparable |
| QwenWebBenchSource | — | 1397 | Not 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 | — | 1049 | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | — | 42.65% | Not comparable |
Coding9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Exaone 4.0 32B | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench HardSource | 1.5% | 34.8% | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 25.2% | 35.8% | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | — | 73.4% | 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 |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
KnowledgeExaone 4.0 32B wins11 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Exaone 4.0 32B | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProSource | 81.8% | 85.2% | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 6.0% | 31.6% | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 62.8% | 84.1% | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads |
| AA-HLESource | 4.9% | 20.2% | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -62.3% | -21.4% | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 10.4% | 18.9% | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 81.0% | 49.7% | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads |
| SuperGPQASource | — | 64.7% | Not comparable |
| C-EvalSource | — | 90% | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | — | 86% | Not comparable |
| HLESource | — | 21.4% | Not comparable |
Math6 benchmarks
Multimodal15 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Exaone 4.0 32B | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Exaone 4.0 32B | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 33.5% | 64.4% | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Exaone 4.0 32B or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 59 to 51. The biggest single separator in this matchup is MMLU-Pro, where the scores are 81.8% and 85.2%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Exaone 4.0 32B or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?
Exaone 4.0 32B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 81.8 versus 51.8. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
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.