Model comparison
o1-pro vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
Head-to-head evidence from 2 shared benchmark results across 1 category. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Verified leaderboard positions: o1-pro unranked; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B #31
BenchAlign evidence: o1-pro estimated; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B estimated. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. o1-pro and Qwen3.6-35B-A3B share 2 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 0 results are unique to o1-pro; 56 to Qwen3.6-35B-A3B.
Updated July 15, 2026- Shared results
- 2
- o1-pro only
- 0
- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B only
- 56
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick Qwen3.6-35B-A3B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. o1-pro only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 2 shared benchmark results across 1 evidence category; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 59 to 31. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B gives you the larger context window at 262K, compared with 200K for o1-pro.
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 | o1-pro | Δ | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | o1-pro79.0 | Margin← 27.2 | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B51.8 |
| Agentic | o1-proNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B51.5 |
| Coding | o1-proNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B73.8 |
| Math | o1-proNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B88.2 |
| Multimodal | o1-proNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B76.3 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
GPQA
KnowledgeA 79%B 86%Winner: Qwen3.6-35B-A3BΔ 7GPQA: o1-pro scored 79%; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B scored 86%. Qwen3.6-35B-A3B wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | o1-pro | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | o1-pro$150 input / $600 output | Qwen3.6-35B-A3BNot available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | o1-proNot available | Qwen3.6-35B-A3BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | o1-proNot available | Qwen3.6-35B-A3BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | o1-pro200K | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B262K | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic15 benchmarks
| Benchmark | o1-pro | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 51.5% | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | — | 68.7% | Not comparable |
| QwenClawBenchSource | — | 52.6% | Not comparable |
| QwenWebBenchSource | — | 1397 | Not 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 | — | 27.4% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 1049 | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | — | 42.65% | Not comparable |
Coding9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | o1-pro | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | — | 73.4% | Not comparable |
| SWE MultilingualSource | — | 67.2% | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | — | 49.5% | 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 |
| Terminal-Bench HardSource | — | 34.8% | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | — | 35.8% | Not comparable |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledgeo1-pro wins11 benchmarks
| Benchmark | o1-pro | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 79% | 86% | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 18.9% | 31.6% | 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 |
| 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 |
Math5 benchmarks
Multimodal15 benchmarks
| Benchmark | o1-pro | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | o1-pro | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | — | 64.4% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, o1-pro or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 59 to 31. The biggest single separator in this matchup is GPQA, where the scores are 79% and 86%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, o1-pro or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?
o1-pro has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 79 versus 51.8. Inside this category, Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index 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.