Granite-4.0-H-1B vs Qwen3.6 Plus

Side-by-side benchmark comparison across agentic, coding, multimodal, knowledge, reasoning, and math workflows.

Agentic
Coding
Multimodal & Grounded
Reasoning
Knowledge
Instruction Following
Multilingual
Mathematics

Granite-4.0-H-1B· Qwen3.6 Plus

Quick Verdict

Pick Qwen3.6 Plus if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Granite-4.0-H-1B only becomes the better choice if you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.

Qwen3.6 Plus is clearly ahead on the aggregate, 69 to 43. 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 multilingual, where it averages 84.7 against 37.8. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is GPQA, 29.9% to 90.4%.

Qwen3.6 Plus is the reasoning model in the pair, while Granite-4.0-H-1B is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Qwen3.6 Plus gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 128K for Granite-4.0-H-1B.

Operational tradeoffs

ProviderIBMAlibaba
PriceFree*Free*
SpeedN/AN/A
TTFTN/AN/A
Context128K1M

Decision framing

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.

BenchmarkGranite-4.0-H-1BQwen3.6 Plus
Agentic
Terminal-Bench 2.061.6%
Claw-Eval58.7%
QwenClawBench57.2%
QwenWebBench1502
TAU3-Bench70.7%
VITA-Bench44.3%
DeepPlanning41.5%
Toolathlon39.8%
MCP Atlas48.2%
MCP-Tasks74.1%
WideResearch74.3%
OSWorld-Verified62.5%
Coding
HumanEval74%
SWE-bench Verified78.8%
SWE-bench Pro56.6%
SWE Multilingual73.8%
LiveCodeBench v687.1%
NL2Repo37.9%
Multimodal & Grounded
MMMU86.0%
MMMU-Pro78.8%
RealWorldQA85.4%
OmniDocBench 1.591.2%
Video-MME (with subtitle)87.8%
Video-MME (w/o subtitle)84.2%
MathVision88.0%
We-Math89.0%
DynaMath88.0%
MStar83.3%
SimpleVQA67.3%
ChatCVQA81.5%
MMLongBench-Doc62.0%
CC-OCR83.4%
AI2D_TEST94.4%
CountBench97.6%
RefCOCO (avg)93.5%
ODINW1351.8%
ERQA65.7%
VideoMMMU84.0%
MLVU (M-Avg)86.7%
ScreenSpot Pro68.2%
Reasoning
BBH60.4%
AI-Needle68.3%
LongBench v262%
KnowledgeQwen3.6 Plus wins
MMLU59.4%
GPQA29.9%90.4%
MMLU-Pro34.0%88.5%
SuperGPQA71.6%
MMLU-Redux94.5%
C-Eval93.3%
HLE28.8%
Instruction FollowingQwen3.6 Plus wins
IFEval77.4%94.3%
IFBench74.2%
MultilingualQwen3.6 Plus wins
MGSM37.8%
MMLU-ProX84.7%
NOVA-6357.9%
INCLUDE85.1%
PolyMath77.4%
VWT2k-lite84.3%
MAXIFE88.2%
Mathematics
AIME2695.3%
HMMT Feb 202596.7%
HMMT Nov 202594.6%
HMMT Feb 202687.8%
MMAnswerBench83.8%
Frequently Asked Questions (4)

Which is better, Granite-4.0-H-1B or Qwen3.6 Plus?

Qwen3.6 Plus is ahead overall, 69 to 43. The biggest single separator in this matchup is GPQA, where the scores are 29.9% and 90.4%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, Granite-4.0-H-1B or Qwen3.6 Plus?

Qwen3.6 Plus has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 66 versus 32.6. Inside this category, GPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for instruction following, Granite-4.0-H-1B or Qwen3.6 Plus?

Qwen3.6 Plus has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 94.3 versus 77.4. Inside this category, IFEval is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for multilingual tasks, Granite-4.0-H-1B or Qwen3.6 Plus?

Qwen3.6 Plus has the edge for multilingual tasks in this comparison, averaging 84.7 versus 37.8. Granite-4.0-H-1B stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.

Last updated: April 2, 2026

Weekly LLM Benchmark Digest

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.