Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

Laguna M.1 vs Qwen3.6 Plus

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 4 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
64.41/100
0 category wins2 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Laguna M.1 unranked (Not scored); Qwen3.6 Plus #34 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Laguna M.1 and Qwen3.6 Plus share 4 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 1 result is unique to Laguna M.1; 56 to Qwen3.6 Plus.

Updated July 27, 2026
Shared results
4
Laguna M.1 only
1
Qwen3.6 Plus only
56
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 Plus is the better fit if agentic is the priority or you need the larger 1M context window.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 4 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 Plus 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 Plus gives you the larger context window at 1M, 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 Plus
CategoryLaguna M.1ΔQwen3.6 Plus
AgenticLaguna M.145.8Margin→ 15.8Qwen3.6 Plus61.6
CodingLaguna M.164.8Margin→ 5.5Qwen3.6 Plus70.3
ReasoningLaguna M.1Not measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.6 Plus62.0
KnowledgeLaguna M.1Not measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.6 Plus57.1
MathLaguna M.1Not measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.6 Plus60.5
MultilingualLaguna M.1Not measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.6 Plus84.7
MultimodalLaguna M.1Not measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.6 Plus79.8
Inst. FollowingLaguna M.1Not measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.6 Plus82.3

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · Laguna M.1B · Qwen3.6 Plus

  1. Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 45.8%B 61.6%
    Winner: Qwen3.6 PlusΔ 15.8
    Terminal-Bench 2.0: Laguna M.1 scored 45.8%; Qwen3.6 Plus scored 61.6%. Qwen3.6 Plus wins this benchmark.

  2. SWE-bench Pro

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 49.2%B 56.6%
    Winner: Qwen3.6 PlusΔ 7.4
    SWE-bench Pro: Laguna M.1 scored 49.2%; Qwen3.6 Plus scored 56.6%. Qwen3.6 Plus wins this benchmark.

  3. SWE-bench Verified

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 74.6%B 78.8%
    Winner: Qwen3.6 PlusΔ 4.2
    SWE-bench Verified: Laguna M.1 scored 74.6%; Qwen3.6 Plus scored 78.8%. Qwen3.6 Plus wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricLaguna M.1Qwen3.6 PlusComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensLaguna M.1Not availableQwen3.6 PlusNot availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondLaguna M.1Not availableQwen3.6 PlusNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenLaguna M.1Not availableQwen3.6 PlusNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensLaguna M.1256KQwen3.6 Plus1MQwen3.6 Plus lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticQwen3.6 Plus wins
BenchmarkLaguna M.1Qwen3.6 PlusResult
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 45.8%61.6%Qwen3.6 Plus leads
Claw-EvalSource —58.8%Not comparable
QwenClawBenchSource —57.2%Not comparable
τ³-bench resultsSource —70.7%Not comparable
VITA-BenchSource —44.3%Not comparable
DeepPlanningSource —41.5%Not comparable
ToolathlonSource —39.8%Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource —48.2%Not comparable
MCP-TasksSource —74.1%Not comparable
WideResearchSource —74.3%Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource —27.6%Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource —97.7%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource —31.9%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource —1139Not comparable
Gert LabsSource —50.60%Not comparable
ResearchClawBenchSource —18.0%Not comparable
CodingQwen3.6 Plus wins
BenchmarkLaguna M.1Qwen3.6 PlusResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 74.6%78.8%Qwen3.6 Plus leads
SWE MultilingualSource 63.1%73.8%Qwen3.6 Plus leads
SWE-bench ProSource 49.2%56.6%Qwen3.6 Plus leads
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 45.8%—Not comparable
LiveCodeBench v6Source —87.1%Not comparable
Vibe Code BenchSource —25.56%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource —54.5%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource —40.7%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkLaguna M.1Qwen3.6 PlusResult
AI-NeedleSource —68.3%Not comparable
LongBench v2Source —62%Not comparable
AA-LCRSource —69.7%Not comparable
CritPtSource —2.9%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkLaguna M.1Qwen3.6 PlusResult
GPQASource —90.4%Not comparable
SuperGPQASource —71.6%Not comparable
MMLU-ProSource —88.5%Not comparable
MMLU-ReduxSource —94.5%Not comparable
C-EvalSource —93.3%Not comparable
HLESource —28.8%Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource —39.6%Not comparable
AA-GPQA DiamondSource —88.2%Not comparable
AA-HLESource —25.7%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience IndexSource —2.7%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource —26.2%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource —32.0%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkLaguna M.1Qwen3.6 PlusResult
AIME26Source —95.3%Not comparable
HMMT Feb 2025Source —96.7%Not comparable
HMMT Nov 2025Source —94.6%Not comparable
HMMT Feb 2026Source —87.8%Not comparable
MMAnswerBenchSource —83.8%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source —26.207%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source —8.333%Not comparable
Multilingual
BenchmarkLaguna M.1Qwen3.6 PlusResult
MMLU-ProXSource —84.7%Not comparable
NOVA-63Source —57.9%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkLaguna M.1Qwen3.6 PlusResult
MMMUSource —86.0%Not comparable
MMMU-ProSource —78.8%Not comparable
MathVisionSource —88.0%Not comparable
VideoMMMUSource —84.0%Not comparable
ScreenSpot ProSource —68.2%Not comparable
CharXivSource —81.5%Not comparable
V*Source —96.9%Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource —78.0%Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource —1265Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkLaguna M.1Qwen3.6 PlusResult
IFEvalSource —94.3%Not comparable
IFBenchSource —75.8%Not comparable
AA-IFBenchSource —75.2%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Which is better, Laguna M.1 or Qwen3.6 Plus?

Laguna M.1 and Qwen3.6 Plus 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 Plus?

Qwen3.6 Plus has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 70.3 versus 64.8. Inside this category, SWE Multilingual is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Laguna M.1 or Qwen3.6 Plus?

Qwen3.6 Plus has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 61.6 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.