Model comparison
Qwen3.5 397B vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
Head-to-head evidence from 42 shared benchmark results across 7 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Verified leaderboard positions: Qwen3.5 397B #20; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B #31
BenchAlign evidence: Qwen3.5 397B estimated; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B estimated. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Qwen3.5 397B and Qwen3.6-35B-A3B share 42 comparable benchmark results. 5 of 8 categories are comparable. 14 results are unique to Qwen3.5 397B; 16 to Qwen3.6-35B-A3B.
Updated July 15, 2026- Shared results
- 42
- Qwen3.5 397B only
- 14
- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B only
- 16
- Comparable categories
- 5 / 8
Treat this as a split decision. Qwen3.5 397B makes more sense if knowledge is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B is the better fit if coding is the priority or you need the larger 262K context window.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 42 shared benchmark results across 7 evidence categories; 5 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Qwen3.5 397B and Qwen3.6-35B-A3B finish on the same provisional overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The provisional headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B is the reasoning model in the pair, while Qwen3.5 397B is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Qwen3.6-35B-A3B gives you the larger context window at 262K, compared with 128K for Qwen3.5 397B.
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 | Qwen3.5 397B | Δ | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | Qwen3.5 397B66.5 | Margin→ 7.3 | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B73.8 |
| Knowledge | Qwen3.5 397B56.9 | Margin← 5.1 | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B51.8 |
| Agentic | Qwen3.5 397B56.5 | Margin← 5.0 | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B51.5 |
| Multimodal | Qwen3.5 397B79.6 | Margin← 3.3 | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B76.3 |
| Math | Qwen3.5 397B90.6 | Margin← 2.4 | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B88.2 |
| Reasoning | Qwen3.5 397B63.2 | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.6-35B-A3BNot measured |
| Multilingual | Qwen3.5 397B84.7 | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.6-35B-A3BNot measured |
| Inst. Following | Qwen3.5 397B92.6 | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.6-35B-A3BNot measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
HLE
KnowledgeA 28.7%B 21.4%Winner: Qwen3.5 397BΔ 7.3HLE: Qwen3.5 397B scored 28.7%; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B scored 21.4%. Qwen3.5 397B wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SuperGPQA
KnowledgeA 70.4%B 64.7%Winner: Qwen3.5 397BΔ 5.7SuperGPQA: Qwen3.5 397B scored 70.4%; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B scored 64.7%. Qwen3.5 397B wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
HMMT Feb 2026
MathA 87.9%B 83.6%Winner: Qwen3.5 397BΔ 4.3HMMT Feb 2026: Qwen3.5 397B scored 87.9%; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B scored 83.6%. Qwen3.5 397B wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
MMMU-Pro
MultimodalA 79%B 75.3%Winner: Qwen3.5 397BΔ 3.7MMMU-Pro: Qwen3.5 397B scored 79%; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B scored 75.3%. Qwen3.5 397B wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 76.2%B 73.4%Winner: Qwen3.5 397BΔ 2.8SWE-bench Verified: Qwen3.5 397B scored 76.2%; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B scored 73.4%. Qwen3.5 397B wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Qwen3.5 397B | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Qwen3.5 397B$0.6 input / $3.6 output | Qwen3.6-35B-A3BNot available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Qwen3.5 397B96 tok/s | Qwen3.6-35B-A3BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Qwen3.5 397B2.44 s | Qwen3.6-35B-A3BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Qwen3.5 397B128K | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B262K | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticQwen3.5 397B wins19 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5 397B | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 52.5% | 51.5% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| BrowseCompSource | 62% | — | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | 56.8% | 68.7% | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads |
| QwenClawBenchSource | 51.8% | 52.6% | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads |
| τ³-bench resultsSource | 68.4% | 67.2% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| VITA-BenchSource | 43.7% | 35.6% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| DeepPlanningSource | 37.6% | 25.9% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| ToolathlonSource | 36.3% | 26.9% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| MCP AtlasSource | 46.1% | 62.8% | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads |
| MCP-TasksSource | 74.2% | — | Not comparable |
| WideResearchSource | 74.0% | 60.1% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 95.6% | 95.3% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| Gert LabsSource | 46.76% | 42.65% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | 14.2% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 19.9% | 21.4% | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | 15.3% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 23.1% | 27.4% | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 962 | 1049 | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads |
| QwenWebBenchSource | — | 1397 | Not comparable |
CodingQwen3.6-35B-A3B wins10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5 397B | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 76.2% | 73.4% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| LiveCodeBench v6Source | 83.6% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 50.9% | 49.5% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| Terminal-Bench HardSource | 40.9% | 34.8% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 42.0% | 35.8% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 48.2% | 41.9% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| SWE MultilingualSource | — | 67.2% | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 51.5% | Not comparable |
| LiveCodeBenchSource | — | 80.4% | Not comparable |
| NL2RepoSource | — | 29.4% | Not comparable |
Reasoning4 benchmarks
KnowledgeQwen3.5 397B wins12 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5 397B | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 88.4% | 86% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| SuperGPQASource | 70.4% | 64.7% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| MMLU-ProSource | 87.8% | 85.2% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| MMLU-ReduxSource | 94.9% | — | Not comparable |
| C-EvalSource | 93% | 90% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| HLESource | 28.7% | 21.4% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 33.7% | 31.6% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 89.3% | 84.1% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| AA-HLESource | 27.3% | 20.2% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -29.8% | -21.4% | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 31.4% | 18.9% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 89.1% | 49.7% | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads |
MathQwen3.5 397B wins5 benchmarks
Multilingual2 benchmarks
MultimodalQwen3.5 397B wins18 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5 397B | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMMU-ProSource | 79% | 75.3% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| MathVisionSource | 88.6% | — | Not comparable |
| CharXivSource | 80.8% | 78% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| VideoMMMUSource | 84.7% | 83.7% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| ScreenSpot ProSource | 65.6% | — | Not comparable |
| V*Source | 95.8% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | 77.3% | 75.0% | Qwen3.5 397B leads |
| MMMUSource | — | 81.7% | Not comparable |
| RealWorldQASource | — | 85.3% | Not comparable |
| OmniDocBench 1.5Source | — | 89.9% | 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 |
| MLVU (M-Avg)Source | — | 86.2% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (6)
Which is better, Qwen3.5 397B or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?
Qwen3.5 397B and Qwen3.6-35B-A3B are tied on the provisional overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Qwen3.5 397B or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?
Qwen3.5 397B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 56.9 versus 51.8. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Hallucination Rate is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, Qwen3.5 397B or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 73.8 versus 66.5. Inside this category, AA Coding Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for math, Qwen3.5 397B or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?
Qwen3.5 397B has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 90.6 versus 88.2. Inside this category, HMMT Feb 2026 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Qwen3.5 397B or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?
Qwen3.5 397B has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 56.5 versus 51.5. Inside this category, GDPval-AA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Qwen3.5 397B or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?
Qwen3.5 397B has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 79.6 versus 76.3. Inside this category, MMMU-Pro 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.