Model comparison
GPT-5.1 vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
Head-to-head evidence from 18 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Verified leaderboard positions: GPT-5.1 unranked; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B #31
BenchAlign evidence: GPT-5.1 supported; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B estimated. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. GPT-5.1 and Qwen3.6-35B-A3B share 18 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 4 results are unique to GPT-5.1; 40 to Qwen3.6-35B-A3B.
Updated July 15, 2026- Shared results
- 18
- GPT-5.1 only
- 4
- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B only
- 40
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick GPT-5.1 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 18 shared benchmark results across 6 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
GPT-5.1 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 72 to 59. 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 200K for GPT-5.1.
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 | GPT-5.1 | Δ | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | GPT-5.126.4 | Margin→ 61.8 | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B88.2 |
| Agentic | GPT-5.1Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B51.5 |
| Coding | GPT-5.1Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B73.8 |
| Knowledge | GPT-5.1Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B51.8 |
| Multimodal | GPT-5.1Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B76.3 |
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | GPT-5.1 | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | GPT-5.1$1.25 input / $10 output | Qwen3.6-35B-A3BNot available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | GPT-5.1111 tok/s | Qwen3.6-35B-A3BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | GPT-5.157.47 s | Qwen3.6-35B-A3BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | GPT-5.1200K | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B262K | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic15 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1 | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 21.0% | 21.4% | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 81.9% | 95.3% | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads |
| Gert LabsSource | 41.24% | 42.65% | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 24.4% | 27.4% | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 987 | 1049 | 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 |
Coding10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1 | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vibe Code BenchSource | 24.61% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 49.4% | 41.9% | GPT-5.1 leads |
| Terminal-Bench HardSource | 45.5% | 34.8% | GPT-5.1 leads |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 43.3% | 35.8% | GPT-5.1 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 |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge11 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1 | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 36.9% | 31.6% | GPT-5.1 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 87.3% | 84.1% | GPT-5.1 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 26.5% | 20.2% | GPT-5.1 leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 5.6% | -21.4% | GPT-5.1 leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 37.6% | 18.9% | GPT-5.1 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 51.3% | 49.7% | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads |
| MMLU-ProSource | — | 85.2% | Not comparable |
| SuperGPQASource | — | 64.7% | Not comparable |
| C-EvalSource | — | 90% | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | — | 86% | Not comparable |
| HLESource | — | 21.4% | Not comparable |
MathQwen3.6-35B-A3B wins7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1 | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source | 31.034% | — | Not comparable |
| FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source | 12.500% | — | 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 |
Multimodal16 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1 | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | 75.5% | 75.0% | GPT-5.1 leads |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1222 | — | 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 |
| 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 |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1 | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 72.9% | 64.4% | GPT-5.1 leads |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, GPT-5.1 or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?
GPT-5.1 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 72 to 59.
Which is better for math, GPT-5.1 or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 88.2 versus 26.4. GPT-5.1 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
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.