Model comparison
Nemotron 3 Ultra vs Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)
Head-to-head evidence from 15 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Verified leaderboard positions: Nemotron 3 Ultra #24; Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) unranked
BenchAlign evidence: Nemotron 3 Ultra not scored; Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) supported. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Nemotron 3 Ultra and Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) share 15 comparable benchmark results. 3 of 8 categories are comparable. 24 results are unique to Nemotron 3 Ultra; 7 to Qwen 3.6 Max (preview).
Updated July 16, 2026- Shared results
- 15
- Nemotron 3 Ultra only
- 24
- Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) only
- 7
- Comparable categories
- 3 / 8
Pick Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Nemotron 3 Ultra only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority or you need the larger 1M context window.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 15 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 3 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 68 to 60. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)'s sharpest advantage is in knowledge, where it averages 73.9 against 54.2. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 56.4% to 65.4%. Nemotron 3 Ultra does hit back in coding, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
Nemotron 3 Ultra gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 256K for Qwen 3.6 Max (preview).
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 | Nemotron 3 Ultra | Δ | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | Nemotron 3 Ultra54.2 | Margin→ 19.7 | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)73.9 |
| Agentic | Nemotron 3 Ultra51.3 | Margin→ 14.1 | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)65.4 |
| Coding | Nemotron 3 Ultra58.3 | Margin← 7.3 | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)51.0 |
| Reasoning | Nemotron 3 Ultra61.9 | MarginNo overlap | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Not measured |
| Math | Nemotron 3 UltraNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)18.4 |
| Multilingual | Nemotron 3 Ultra83.0 | MarginNo overlap | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Not measured |
| Inst. Following | Nemotron 3 Ultra81.7 | MarginNo overlap | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Not measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 56.4%B 65.4%Winner: Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Δ 9Terminal-Bench 2.0: Nemotron 3 Ultra scored 56.4%; Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) scored 65.4%. Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SciCode
CodingA 44.6%B 47%Winner: Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Δ 2.4SciCode: Nemotron 3 Ultra scored 44.6%; Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) scored 47%. Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Nemotron 3 Ultra | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Nemotron 3 Ultra$0 input / $0 output | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Not available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Nemotron 3 UltraNot available | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Not available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Nemotron 3 UltraNot available | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Not available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Nemotron 3 Ultra1M | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)256K | Nemotron 3 Ultra lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticQwen 3.6 Max (preview) wins14 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Nemotron 3 Ultra | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 56.4% | 65.4% | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) leads |
| PinchBenchSource | 90.0% | — | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | 44.4% | — | Not comparable |
| τ³-bench resultsSource | 70.9% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 33.2% | — | Not comparable |
| HLE w/ toolsSource | 37.4% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 27.4% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 83.3% | 95.9% | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 1164 | — | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | 870 | — | Not comparable |
| AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource | 28.9% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | 3.3% | — | Not comparable |
| QwenClawBenchSource | — | 59.0% | Not comparable |
| QwenWebBenchSource | — | 1532 | Not comparable |
CodingNemotron 3 Ultra wins10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Nemotron 3 Ultra | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 71.9% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE MultilingualSource | 67.7% | — | Not comparable |
| LiveCodeBench v6Source | 89.0% | — | Not comparable |
| SciCodeSource | 44.6% | 47% | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) leads |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 56.4% | 65.4% | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) leads |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 49.3% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench HardSource | 36.4% | 43.9% | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) leads |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 39.9% | 46.9% | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) leads |
| SWE-bench ProSource | — | 57.3% | Not comparable |
| NL2RepoSource | — | 42.9% | Not comparable |
Reasoning3 benchmarks
KnowledgeQwen 3.6 Max (preview) wins13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Nemotron 3 Ultra | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 87% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | 87.0% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 26.7% | — | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | 26.7% | — | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ProSource | 86.8% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 21.6% | 37.7% | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) leads |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 37.8% | 40.0% | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 86.7% | 88.8% | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) leads |
| AA-HLESource | 26.6% | 28.9% | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -0.8% | 10.2% | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 28.5% | 44.2% | Nemotron 3 Ultra leads |
| AA Openness IndexSource | 83.3% | — | Not comparable |
| SuperGPQASource | — | 73.9% | Not comparable |
Math2 benchmarks
Multilingual1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Nemotron 3 Ultra | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProXSource | 83% | — | Not comparable |
Multimodal1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Nemotron 3 Ultra | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1132 | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (4)
Which is better, Nemotron 3 Ultra or Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)?
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 68 to 60. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 56.4% and 65.4%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Nemotron 3 Ultra or Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)?
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 73.9 versus 54.2. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Accuracy is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, Nemotron 3 Ultra or Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)?
Nemotron 3 Ultra has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 58.3 versus 51. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Nemotron 3 Ultra or Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)?
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 65.4 versus 51.3. Inside this category, τ²-bench results is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
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.