Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

Laguna M.1 vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 5 shared benchmark results across 2 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

Laguna M.1
Poolside
N/A
No comparison
50.46/100
0 category wins2 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Laguna M.1 unranked (Not scored); Qwen3.6-35B-A3B #109 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Laguna M.1 and Qwen3.6-35B-A3B share 5 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 0 results are unique to Laguna M.1; 52 to Qwen3.6-35B-A3B.

Updated July 27, 2026
Shared results
5
Laguna M.1 only
0
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B only
52
Comparable categories
2 / 8

Treat this as a split decision. Laguna M.1 makes more sense if its workflow fits your team better; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B is the better fit if coding is the priority or you need the larger 262K context window.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 5 shared benchmark results across 2 evidence categories; 2 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

Laguna M.1 and Qwen3.6-35B-A3B finish on the same BenchAlign overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The BenchAlign headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B gives you the larger context window at 262K, compared with 256K for Laguna M.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 scores and score margins for Laguna M.1 and Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
CategoryLaguna M.1ΔQwen3.6-35B-A3B
CodingLaguna M.164.8Margin→ 9.0Qwen3.6-35B-A3B73.8
AgenticLaguna M.145.8Margin→ 5.7Qwen3.6-35B-A3B51.5
KnowledgeLaguna M.1Not measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.6-35B-A3B51.4
MathLaguna M.1Not measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.6-35B-A3B88.2
MultimodalLaguna M.1Not measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.6-35B-A3B76.3

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · Laguna M.1B · Qwen3.6-35B-A3B

  1. Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 45.8%B 51.5%
    Winner: Qwen3.6-35B-A3BΔ 5.7
    Terminal-Bench 2.0: Laguna M.1 scored 45.8%; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B scored 51.5%. Qwen3.6-35B-A3B wins this benchmark.

  2. SWE-bench Verified

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 74.6%B 73.4%
    Winner: Laguna M.1Δ 1.2
    SWE-bench Verified: Laguna M.1 scored 74.6%; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B scored 73.4%. Laguna M.1 wins this benchmark.

  3. SWE-bench Pro

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 49.2%B 49.5%
    Winner: Qwen3.6-35B-A3BΔ 0.3
    SWE-bench Pro: Laguna M.1 scored 49.2%; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B scored 49.5%. Qwen3.6-35B-A3B wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricLaguna M.1Qwen3.6-35B-A3BComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensLaguna M.1Not availableQwen3.6-35B-A3BNot availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondLaguna M.1Not availableQwen3.6-35B-A3BNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenLaguna M.1Not availableQwen3.6-35B-A3BNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensLaguna M.1256KQwen3.6-35B-A3B262KQwen3.6-35B-A3B lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticQwen3.6-35B-A3B wins
BenchmarkLaguna M.1Qwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 45.8%51.5%Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads
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
τ²-bench resultsSource —95.3%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource —27.6%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource —1052Not comparable
Gert LabsSource —42.65%Not comparable
CodingQwen3.6-35B-A3B wins
BenchmarkLaguna M.1Qwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 74.6%73.4%Laguna M.1 leads
SWE MultilingualSource 63.1%67.2%Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads
SWE-bench ProSource 49.2%49.5%Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 45.8%51.5%Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads
LiveCodeBenchSource —80.4%Not comparable
NL2RepoSource —29.4%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource —41.9%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource —35.8%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkLaguna M.1Qwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
AA-LCRSource —63.7%Not comparable
CritPtSource —0.3%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkLaguna M.1Qwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
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
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource —31.6%Not comparable
AA-GPQA DiamondSource —84.1%Not comparable
AA-HLESource —20.2%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience IndexSource —-21.4%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource —18.9%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource —49.7%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkLaguna M.1Qwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
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
Multimodal
BenchmarkLaguna M.1Qwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
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. Following
BenchmarkLaguna M.1Qwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
AA-IFBenchSource —64.4%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Which is better, Laguna M.1 or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?

Laguna M.1 and Qwen3.6-35B-A3B are tied on the BenchAlign overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.

Which is better for coding, Laguna M.1 or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 73.8 versus 64.8. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Laguna M.1 or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 51.5 versus 45.8. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Explore More

Poolside Compare Pricing Methodology Find Your Best LLM Overall Rankings
Last updated: July 27, 2026

Know when it’s worth switching models

The model to choose, the cheaper alternative, and the release we would wait on.

One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.