Quasar 438B vs Qwen3.6 Plus

Updated October 17, 2026. Rank says Qwen3.6 Plus is ahead. Price, access, and your workload can each overturn that. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty.

Decision reading

The public evidence has no benchmark result shared by both models, so it does not support a quality verdict. Use the documented cost, context, and runtime rows instead. 0 results are shared. Category rows resting on Estimated evidence or different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.

Model A

Quasar 438B

Multiverse Computing

48.46/100

Estimated · Public rank #102

Conditional range 34.1–62.8

Model B

Qwen3.6 Plus

Alibaba

53.78/100

Supported · Public rank #75

90% interval 44.2–63.4

Shared results: 0
Quasar 438B only: 2
Qwen3.6 Plus only: 49
Like-for-like categories: 0 / 8

Estimated: Quasar 438B · Supported: Qwen3.6 Plus. Conditional ranges do not establish rank confidence.How the comparison works

Which one for your work

Recommendations appear only when a shared evidence basis or an explicit operating constraint supports the call. Secondary and unsupported use cases stay disclosed below the initial list.

No workload recommendation clears the current evidence threshold.

Use the matched evidence, workload costs, and sourced specifications below instead of treating a point score as a universal answer.

Show secondary and unsupported calls

Coding work
Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks
Not enough matched evidence
Quasar 438B is scored on Estimated evidence for coding, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like.
Confidence: limited
Agentic work
Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion
Not enough matched evidence
Quasar 438B is scored on Estimated evidence for agentic, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like.
Confidence: limited
Long documents
Prompts that approach the documented context limit
No clear pick
The documented context windows are equal.
Confidence: documented
Chat turn cost
1K fresh input + 500 output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Confidence: listed-rates
Cache-heavy agent loop cost
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Confidence: rate-fallback
Repository review cost
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Confidence: listed-rates

Which one for a specific job

Choose a job from the LLM Selector's task catalog to see the category row it rests on, under the same basis rules as the table below. A directional row stays directional; choosing a job never creates a winner.

Pick the job you would use them for

The same task catalog as the LLM Selector. Each job names the evidence surface it rests on; nothing here adds a new score.

41.2Quasar 438B40.0Qwen3.6 Plus

Directional only · BenchAlign v5.8

Quasar 438B has the higher coding point estimate. Conditional score ranges do not establish rank confidence.

Coding scores combine specific tasks and setups. Match the editor, harness, and effort to your workflow.

Open the coding leaderboard Shortlist models for this job

Same basis rules as the category table below

Shape of the matched evidence

Only shared public evidence is shown. Sparse evidence stays a ruled list rather than being closed into a radar shape.

A shared-evidence shape is not available.

BenchLM does not draw a radar or infer missing axes when the matched evidence is too sparse.

Category results, on a stated basis

Each row shows the public-lane category score for both models: the BenchAlign v5.8 lane for agentic, coding, and knowledge, and the weighted public rows elsewhere, with the same rank each model page reports. A row is like-for-like only when both scores rest on Supported evidence or the same weighted set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner.

Agentic

Directional only

Quasar 438B: 40.0; Estimated · #67/128
Qwen3.6 Plus: 34.4; Supported · #83/128
Basis: BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 1 vs 13 public rows
Reading: Directional only

Coding

Directional only

Quasar 438B: 41.2; Estimated · #63/150
Qwen3.6 Plus: 40.0; Supported · #66/150
Basis: BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 1 vs 9 public rows
Reading: Directional only

Knowledge

Directional only

Quasar 438B: 46.7; Estimated · #92/184
Qwen3.6 Plus: 53.4; Supported · #66/184
Basis: BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 0 vs 8 public rows
Reading: Directional only

Reasoning

Not comparable

Quasar 438B: 78.3; Unranked · 2 rankable rows
Qwen3.6 Plus: 74.7; Unranked · 4 rankable rows
Basis: Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
Reading: Not comparable

Multimodal

Not comparable

Quasar 438B: Not ranked
Qwen3.6 Plus: 76.1; #21/54
Basis: Provisional lane · 0 vs 2 weighted rows
Reading: Not comparable

Multilingual

Not comparable

Quasar 438B: Not ranked
Qwen3.6 Plus: 93.8; #4/17
Basis: Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
Reading: Not comparable

Instruction following

Not comparable

Quasar 438B: Not ranked
Qwen3.6 Plus: 85.8; #47/148
Basis: Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
Reading: Not comparable

Math

Not comparable

Quasar 438B: Not ranked
Qwen3.6 Plus: 69.5; #6/12
Basis: Provisional lane · 0 vs 3 weighted rows
Reading: Not comparable

Category scores with the server-provided evidence basis for Quasar 438B and Qwen3.6 Plus
Category	Quasar 438B	Qwen3.6 Plus	Basis	Reading
Agentic	40.0Estimated · #67/128	34.4Supported · #83/128	Directional onlyBenchAlign v5.8 lane · 1 vs 13 public rows	Directional only
Coding	41.2Estimated · #63/150	40.0Supported · #66/150	Directional onlyBenchAlign v5.8 lane · 1 vs 9 public rows	Directional only
Knowledge	46.7Estimated · #92/184	53.4Supported · #66/184	Directional onlyBenchAlign v5.8 lane · 0 vs 8 public rows	Directional only
Reasoning	78.3Unranked · 2 rankable rows	74.7Unranked · 4 rankable rows	Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows	Not comparable
Multimodal	Not ranked	76.1#21/54	Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 2 weighted rows	Not comparable
Multilingual	Not ranked	93.8#4/17	Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows	Not comparable
Instruction following	Not ranked	85.8#47/148	Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows	Not comparable
Math	Not ranked	69.5#6/12	Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 3 weighted rows	Not comparable

Ranks count the models scored in each category’s lane, so the agentic, coding, and knowledge denominators (BenchAlign v5.8) differ from the provisional-lane categories. Unranked scores sit on the provisional lane’s scale but never name a winner. Like-for-like rows within 0.5 points read as a practical tie.

Supported evidence per lane · bars run 0–100Methodology

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes turn per-token rates into comparable decisions. Each scenario states context fit and whether cached input had to fall back to the published list-input rate.

Chat turn

1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

Quasar 438B: $0.0015; Fits in one request
Qwen3.6 Plus: API rate not published; Fits in one request

Qwen3.6 Plus has no comparable published API token rate.

Repository review

50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

Quasar 438B: $0.0354; Fits in one request
Qwen3.6 Plus: API rate not published; Fits in one request

Qwen3.6 Plus has no comparable published API token rate.

Cache-heavy agent loop

200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

Quasar 438B: $0.15; Fits in one request; Cached input priced at the published list-input rate
Qwen3.6 Plus: API rate not published; Fits in one request; Cached-input rate unavailable

Quasar 438B has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate. Qwen3.6 Plus has no comparable published API token rate.

Cached input falls back to the list input rate only where a cached rate is unpublished

Specification differences

Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.

SpecificationQuasar 438BQwen3.6 Plus

Context window

Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.

Quasar 438B

CompactifAI API pricing

Qwen3.6 Plus

API model ID

Quasar 438B

quasar-438b

CompactifAI Quasar 438B documentation

Qwen3.6 Plus

Not sourced

Cached-input rate

A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.

Quasar 438B

Not published

CompactifAI API pricing

Qwen3.6 Plus

No comparable hosted API rate

Documented inputs

Quasar 438B

Not sourced

Qwen3.6 Plus

Not sourced

Documented outputs

Quasar 438B

Not sourced

Qwen3.6 Plus

Not sourced

Provider availability

Quasar 438B

Generally Available · CompactifAI API

CompactifAI Quasar 438B documentation

Qwen3.6 Plus

Not sourced

Reasoning profile

Quasar 438B

Reasoning

Qwen3.6 Plus

Reasoning

Weight access

Quasar 438B

Proprietary

Qwen3.6 Plus

Proprietary

License

Quasar 438B

Proprietary

Qwen3.6 Plus

Proprietary

Release date

Quasar 438B

2026-09-02

Qwen3.6 Plus

2026-04-02

If you already use one of these models

Deployment change: The models list different providers, so authentication, endpoint behavior, limits, and feature support may change.
Quality signal: The public evidence has no benchmark result shared by both models, so it does not support a quality verdict.
Workload cost: A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Context tradeoff: Both models list 1M.

Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.

Questions

Which is better, Quasar 438B or Qwen3.6 Plus?

The public evidence has no benchmark result shared by both models, so it does not support a quality verdict. The page therefore keeps the decision tied to the specific documented workload.

Which is better for coding, Quasar 438B or Qwen3.6 Plus?

Quasar 438B scores higher for coding on the public lane, 41.2 to 40. Quasar 438B is scored on Estimated evidence for coding, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like. BenchLM does not name a winner for coding from a directional reading; read the shared benchmark rows directly and test the models on the same task set.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Quasar 438B or Qwen3.6 Plus?

Quasar 438B scores higher for agentic tasks on the public lane, 40 to 34.4. Quasar 438B is scored on Estimated evidence for agentic tasks, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like. BenchLM does not name a winner for agentic tasks from a directional reading; read the shared benchmark rows directly and test the models on the same task set.

Which costs less, Quasar 438B or Qwen3.6 Plus?

Both models do not have comparable published API token rates, so this page does not name a universal price winner.

Which has the larger context window, Quasar 438B or Qwen3.6 Plus?

Both models list the same context window, 1M.

Benchmark evidence

The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.

Browse raw public benchmark evidence51 rows

Agentic

Terminal-Bench 2.1
Quasar 438B69.3%
Source
Qwen3.6 Plus—
Not directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus61.6%
Source
Not directly comparable
Claw-Eval
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus58.8%
Source
Not directly comparable
QwenClawBench
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus57.2%
Source
Not directly comparable
τ³-bench results
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus70.7%
Source
Not directly comparable
VITA-Bench
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus44.3%
Source
Not directly comparable
DeepPlanning
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus41.5%
Source
Not directly comparable
Toolathlon
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus39.8%
Source
Not directly comparable
MCP Atlas
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus48.2%
Source
Not directly comparable
MCP-Tasks
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus74.1%
Source
Not directly comparable
WideResearch
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus74.3%
Source
Not directly comparable
Gert Labs
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus50.60%
Source
Not directly comparable
ResearchClawBench
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus18.0%
Source
Not directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus53.2%
Source
Not directly comparable

Coding

Terminal-Bench 2.1
Quasar 438B69.3%
Source
Qwen3.6 Plus—
Not directly comparable
SWE-bench Verified
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus78.8%
Source
Not directly comparable
SWE-bench Pro
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus56.6%
Source
Not directly comparable
SWE Multilingual
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus73.8%
Source
Not directly comparable
LiveCodeBench v6
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus87.1%
Source
Not directly comparable
NL2Repo
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus37.9%
Source
Not directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus61.6%
Source
Not directly comparable
Vibe Code Bench
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus25.56%
Source
Not directly comparable
LiveCodeBench (Vals)
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus86.0%
Source
Not directly comparable
SWE-bench (Vals)
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus73.4%
Source
Not directly comparable

Reasoning

AI-Needle
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus68.3%
Source
Not directly comparable
LongBench v2
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus62%
Source
Not directly comparable

Multimodal

MMMU
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus86.0%
Source
Not directly comparable
MMMU-Pro
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus78.8%
Source
Not directly comparable
MathVision
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus88.0%
Source
Not directly comparable
VideoMMMU
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus84.0%
Source
Not directly comparable
ScreenSpot Pro
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus68.2%
Source
Not directly comparable
CharXiv
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus81.5%
Source
Not directly comparable
V*
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus96.9%
Source
Not directly comparable

Knowledge

GPQA
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus90.4%
Source
Not directly comparable
SuperGPQA
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus71.6%
Source
Not directly comparable
MMLU-Pro
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus88.5%
Source
Not directly comparable
MMLU-Redux
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus94.5%
Source
Not directly comparable
C-Eval
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus93.3%
Source
Not directly comparable
HLE
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus28.8%
Source
Not directly comparable
GPQA Diamond (Vals)
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus87.4%
Source
Not directly comparable
MMLU-Pro (Vals)
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus87.7%
Source
Not directly comparable

Multilingual

MMLU-ProX
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus84.7%
Source
Not directly comparable
NOVA-63
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus57.9%
Source
Not directly comparable

Instruction following

IFEval
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus94.3%
Source
Not directly comparable
IFBench
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus75.8%
Source
Not directly comparable

Math

AIME26
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus95.3%
Source
Not directly comparable
HMMT Feb 2025
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus96.7%
Source
Not directly comparable
HMMT Nov 2025
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus94.6%
Source
Not directly comparable
HMMT Feb 2026
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus87.8%
Source
Not directly comparable
MMAnswerBench
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus83.8%
Source
Not directly comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)
Quasar 438B—
Qwen3.6 Plus38.246%
Source
Not directly comparable

51 public results · 0 shared

Related comparisons

Compare API pricing Read the methodology Open the model selector

Watch Quasar 438B vs Qwen3.6 Plus

One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.

Read a sample issue

Join 5,600+ readers.

Last updated October 17, 2026

Quasar 438B vs Qwen3.6 Plus

Decision reading

Which one for your work

Coding work

Agentic work

Long documents

Chat turn cost

Cache-heavy agent loop cost

Repository review cost

Which one for a specific job

What is actually comparable

Shape of the matched evidence

Category results, on a stated basis

Agentic

Coding

Knowledge

Reasoning

Multimodal

Multilingual

Instruction following

Math

What each workload costs

Chat turn

Repository review

Cache-heavy agent loop

Specification differences

Context window

API model ID

Cached-input rate

Documented inputs

Documented outputs

Provider availability

Reasoning profile

Weight access

License

Release date

If you already use one of these models

Questions

Which is better, Quasar 438B or Qwen3.6 Plus?

Which is better for coding, Quasar 438B or Qwen3.6 Plus?

Which is better for agentic tasks, Quasar 438B or Qwen3.6 Plus?

Which costs less, Quasar 438B or Qwen3.6 Plus?

Which has the larger context window, Quasar 438B or Qwen3.6 Plus?

Benchmark evidence

Agentic

Coding

Reasoning

Multimodal

Knowledge

Multilingual

Instruction following

Math

Related comparisons

Watch Quasar 438B vs Qwen3.6 Plus