Skip to main content

Model comparison

GPT-5.2 vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 18 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

OpenAI
58.36/100
Margin
7.0pts
← winning
51.36/100
3 category wins2 category wins

Verified leaderboard positions: GPT-5.2 #23; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B #31

BenchAlign evidence: GPT-5.2 estimated; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B estimated. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. GPT-5.2 and Qwen3.6-35B-A3B share 18 comparable benchmark results. 5 of 8 categories are comparable. 11 results are unique to GPT-5.2; 40 to Qwen3.6-35B-A3B.

Updated July 15, 2026
Shared results
18
GPT-5.2 only
11
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B only
40
Comparable categories
5 / 8

Pick GPT-5.2 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3.6-35B-A3B only becomes the better choice if mathematics is the priority.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 18 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

GPT-5.2 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 75 to 59. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

GPT-5.2's sharpest advantage is in knowledge, where it averages 92.4 against 51.8. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Verified, 80% to 73.4%. 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.

GPT-5.2 gives you the larger context window at 400K, 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 GPT-5.2 and Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
CategoryGPT-5.2ΔQwen3.6-35B-A3B
MathGPT-5.235.2Margin 53.0Qwen3.6-35B-A3B88.2
KnowledgeGPT-5.292.4Margin 40.6Qwen3.6-35B-A3B51.8
AgenticGPT-5.255.7Margin 4.2Qwen3.6-35B-A3B51.5
MultimodalGPT-5.280.4Margin 4.1Qwen3.6-35B-A3B76.3
CodingGPT-5.270.6Margin 3.2Qwen3.6-35B-A3B73.8
ReasoningGPT-5.252.9MarginNo overlapQwen3.6-35B-A3BNot measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · GPT-5.2B · Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
  1. SWE-bench Verified

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 80%B 73.4%
    Winner: GPT-5.2Δ 6.6
    SWE-bench Verified: GPT-5.2 scored 80%; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B scored 73.4%. GPT-5.2 wins this benchmark.
  2. GPQA

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 92.4%B 86%
    Winner: GPT-5.2Δ 6.4
    GPQA: GPT-5.2 scored 92.4%; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B scored 86%. GPT-5.2 wins this benchmark.
  3. SWE-bench Pro

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 55.6%B 49.5%
    Winner: GPT-5.2Δ 6.1
    SWE-bench Pro: GPT-5.2 scored 55.6%; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B scored 49.5%. GPT-5.2 wins this benchmark.
  4. MMMU-Pro

    Multimodal
    Source ↗
    A 79.5%B 75.3%
    Winner: GPT-5.2Δ 4.2
    MMMU-Pro: GPT-5.2 scored 79.5%; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B scored 75.3%. GPT-5.2 wins this benchmark.
  5. CharXiv

    Multimodal
    Source ↗
    A 82.1%B 78%
    Winner: GPT-5.2Δ 4.1
    CharXiv: GPT-5.2 scored 82.1%; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B scored 78%. GPT-5.2 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricGPT-5.2Qwen3.6-35B-A3BComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGPT-5.2$1.75 input / $14 outputQwen3.6-35B-A3BNot availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondGPT-5.273 tok/sQwen3.6-35B-A3BNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGPT-5.2130.34 sQwen3.6-35B-A3BNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGPT-5.2400KQwen3.6-35B-A3B262KGPT-5.2 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticGPT-5.2 wins
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Qwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
BrowseCompSource 65.8%Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 47.3%Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 84.8%95.3%Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads
Gert LabsSource 46.54%42.65%GPT-5.2 leads
JobBenchSource 34.3%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 51.5%Not comparable
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
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
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Qwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 80%73.4%GPT-5.2 leads
SWE-bench ProSource 55.6%49.5%GPT-5.2 leads
Vibe Code BenchSource 53.50%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench HardSource 47.0%34.8%GPT-5.2 leads
AA-SciCodeSource 52.1%35.8%GPT-5.2 leads
SWE MultilingualSource 67.2%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
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Qwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
ARC-AGI-2Source 52.9%Not comparable
AA-LCRSource 72.7%63.7%GPT-5.2 leads
CritPtSource 11.6%0.3%GPT-5.2 leads
KnowledgeGPT-5.2 wins
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Qwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
GPQASource 92.4%86%GPT-5.2 leads
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 42.2%31.6%GPT-5.2 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 90.3%84.1%GPT-5.2 leads
AA-HLESource 35.4%20.2%GPT-5.2 leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -1.0%-21.4%GPT-5.2 leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 43.8%18.9%GPT-5.2 leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 79.7%49.7%Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads
MMLU-ProSource 85.2%Not comparable
SuperGPQASource 64.7%Not comparable
C-EvalSource 90%Not comparable
HLESource 21.4%Not comparable
MathQwen3.6-35B-A3B wins
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Qwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
AA AIME 2025Source 99.0%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 40.700%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 18.800%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
MultimodalGPT-5.2 wins
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Qwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
MMMU-ProSource 79.5%75.3%GPT-5.2 leads
MathVisionSource 83.0%Not comparable
CharXivSource 82.1%78%GPT-5.2 leads
V*Source 75.9%Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1229Not comparable
MMMUSource 81.7%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
AA-MMMU-ProSource 75.0%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Qwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
AA-IFBenchSource 75.4%64.4%GPT-5.2 leads
Frequently Asked Questions (6)

Which is better, GPT-5.2 or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?

GPT-5.2 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 75 to 59. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 80% and 73.4%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, GPT-5.2 or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?

GPT-5.2 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 92.4 versus 51.8. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Hallucination Rate is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for coding, GPT-5.2 or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 73.8 versus 70.6. Inside this category, AA-SciCode is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for math, GPT-5.2 or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 88.2 versus 35.2. GPT-5.2 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.

Which is better for agentic tasks, GPT-5.2 or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?

GPT-5.2 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 55.7 versus 51.5. Inside this category, τ²-bench results is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, GPT-5.2 or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?

GPT-5.2 has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 80.4 versus 76.3. Inside this category, MMMU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

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.