Side-by-side benchmark comparison across agentic, coding, multimodal, knowledge, reasoning, and math workflows.
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
67
2/8 categoriesQwen3.6 Plus
69
Winner · 5/8 categoriesQwen3.5-35B-A3B· Qwen3.6 Plus
Pick Qwen3.6 Plus if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3.5-35B-A3B only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority.
Qwen3.6 Plus has the cleaner overall profile here, landing at 69 versus 67. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.
Qwen3.6 Plus's sharpest advantage is in agentic, where it averages 62 against 50.5. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 40.5% to 61.6%. Qwen3.5-35B-A3B does hit back in knowledge, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
Qwen3.6 Plus gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 262K for Qwen3.5-35B-A3B.
BenchLM keeps the benchmark table and the operator tradeoffs on the same page so a better score does not hide a materially slower, pricier, or smaller-context model.
Runtime metrics show N/A when BenchLM does not have a sourced snapshot for that exact model. The scoring rules and freshness policy are documented on the methodology page.
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| AgenticQwen3.6 Plus wins | ||
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | 40.5% | 61.6% |
| BrowseComp | 61% | — |
| OSWorld-Verified | 54.5% | 62.5% |
| Tau2-Telecom | 81.2% | — |
| Claw-Eval | — | 58.7% |
| QwenClawBench | — | 57.2% |
| QwenWebBench | — | 1502 |
| TAU3-Bench | — | 70.7% |
| VITA-Bench | — | 44.3% |
| DeepPlanning | — | 41.5% |
| Toolathlon | — | 39.8% |
| MCP Atlas | — | 48.2% |
| MCP-Tasks | — | 74.1% |
| WideResearch | — | 74.3% |
| CodingQwen3.5-35B-A3B wins | ||
| SWE-bench Verified | 69.2% | 78.8% |
| LiveCodeBench | 74.6% | — |
| SWE-bench Pro | — | 56.6% |
| SWE Multilingual | — | 73.8% |
| LiveCodeBench v6 | — | 87.1% |
| NL2Repo | — | 37.9% |
| Multimodal & GroundedQwen3.6 Plus wins | ||
| MMMU-Pro | 75.1% | 78.8% |
| MMMU | — | 86.0% |
| RealWorldQA | — | 85.4% |
| OmniDocBench 1.5 | — | 91.2% |
| Video-MME (with subtitle) | — | 87.8% |
| Video-MME (w/o subtitle) | — | 84.2% |
| MathVision | — | 88.0% |
| We-Math | — | 89.0% |
| DynaMath | — | 88.0% |
| MStar | — | 83.3% |
| SimpleVQA | — | 67.3% |
| ChatCVQA | — | 81.5% |
| MMLongBench-Doc | — | 62.0% |
| CC-OCR | — | 83.4% |
| AI2D_TEST | — | 94.4% |
| CountBench | — | 97.6% |
| RefCOCO (avg) | — | 93.5% |
| ODINW13 | — | 51.8% |
| ERQA | — | 65.7% |
| VideoMMMU | — | 84.0% |
| MLVU (M-Avg) | — | 86.7% |
| ScreenSpot Pro | — | 68.2% |
| ReasoningQwen3.6 Plus wins | ||
| LongBench v2 | 59% | 62% |
| AI-Needle | — | 68.3% |
| KnowledgeQwen3.5-35B-A3B wins | ||
| MMLU-Pro | 85.3% | 88.5% |
| SuperGPQA | 63.4% | 71.6% |
| GPQA | 84.2% | 90.4% |
| MMLU-Redux | — | 94.5% |
| C-Eval | — | 93.3% |
| HLE | — | 28.8% |
| Instruction FollowingQwen3.6 Plus wins | ||
| IFEval | 91.9% | 94.3% |
| IFBench | — | 74.2% |
| MultilingualQwen3.6 Plus wins | ||
| MMLU-ProX | 81% | 84.7% |
| NOVA-63 | — | 57.9% |
| INCLUDE | — | 85.1% |
| PolyMath | — | 77.4% |
| VWT2k-lite | — | 84.3% |
| MAXIFE | — | 88.2% |
| Mathematics | ||
| AIME26 | — | 95.3% |
| HMMT Feb 2025 | — | 96.7% |
| HMMT Nov 2025 | — | 94.6% |
| HMMT Feb 2026 | — | 87.8% |
| MMAnswerBench | — | 83.8% |
Qwen3.6 Plus is ahead overall, 69 to 67. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 40.5% and 61.6%.
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 79.3 versus 66. Inside this category, SuperGPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 72.6 versus 64.9. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Qwen3.6 Plus has the edge for reasoning in this comparison, averaging 62 versus 59. Inside this category, LongBench v2 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Qwen3.6 Plus has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 62 versus 50.5. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Qwen3.6 Plus has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 78.8 versus 75.1. Inside this category, MMMU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Qwen3.6 Plus has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 94.3 versus 91.9. Inside this category, IFEval is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Qwen3.6 Plus has the edge for multilingual tasks in this comparison, averaging 84.7 versus 81. Inside this category, MMLU-ProX is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Get notified when new models drop, benchmark scores change, or the leaderboard shifts. One email per week.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime. We only store derived location metadata for consent routing.