Skip to main content

Model comparison

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B vs Qwen3.7 Plus

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 43 shared benchmark results across 7 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

51.47/100
Margin
15.8pts
winning →
67.22/100
0 category wins5 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Qwen3.6-35B-A3B #104 (Estimated); Qwen3.7 Plus #21 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Qwen3.6-35B-A3B and Qwen3.7 Plus share 43 comparable benchmark results. 5 of 8 categories are comparable. 14 results are unique to Qwen3.6-35B-A3B; 26 to Qwen3.7 Plus.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
43
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B only
14
Qwen3.7 Plus only
26
Comparable categories
5 / 8

Pick Qwen3.7 Plus if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3.6-35B-A3B only becomes the better choice if its workflow or ecosystem matters more than the raw scoreboard.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 43 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

Qwen3.7 Plus is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 67.22 to 51.47. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

Qwen3.7 Plus's sharpest advantage is in agentic, where it averages 71.7 against 51.5. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 51.5% to 70.3%.

Qwen3.7 Plus gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 262K for Qwen3.6-35B-A3B.

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 scores and score margins for Qwen3.6-35B-A3B and Qwen3.7 Plus
CategoryQwen3.6-35B-A3BΔQwen3.7 Plus
AgenticQwen3.6-35B-A3B51.5Margin 20.2Qwen3.7 Plus71.7
KnowledgeQwen3.6-35B-A3B51.4Margin 8.7Qwen3.7 Plus60.1
MultimodalQwen3.6-35B-A3B76.3Margin 5.2Qwen3.7 Plus81.5
MathQwen3.6-35B-A3B88.2Margin 4.7Qwen3.7 Plus92.9
CodingQwen3.6-35B-A3B73.8Margin 1.8Qwen3.7 Plus75.6
ReasoningQwen3.6-35B-A3BNot measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.7 Plus91.7
MultilingualQwen3.6-35B-A3BNot measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.7 Plus85.4
Inst. FollowingQwen3.6-35B-A3BNot measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.7 Plus84.5

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · Qwen3.6-35B-A3BB · Qwen3.7 Plus
  1. Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 51.5%B 70.3%
    Winner: Qwen3.7 PlusΔ 18.8
    Terminal-Bench 2.0: Qwen3.6-35B-A3B scored 51.5%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 70.3%. Qwen3.7 Plus wins this benchmark.
  2. HLE

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 21.4%B 34.7%
    Winner: Qwen3.7 PlusΔ 13.3
    HLE: Qwen3.6-35B-A3B scored 21.4%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 34.7%. Qwen3.7 Plus wins this benchmark.
  3. HMMT Feb 2026

    Math
    Source ↗
    A 83.6%B 92.9%
    Winner: Qwen3.7 PlusΔ 9.3
    HMMT Feb 2026: Qwen3.6-35B-A3B scored 83.6%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 92.9%. Qwen3.7 Plus wins this benchmark.
  4. LiveCodeBench

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 80.4%B 89.6%
    Winner: Qwen3.7 PlusΔ 9.2
    LiveCodeBench: Qwen3.6-35B-A3B scored 80.4%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 89.6%. Qwen3.7 Plus wins this benchmark.
  5. SWE-bench Pro

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 49.5%B 57.6%
    Winner: Qwen3.7 PlusΔ 8.1
    SWE-bench Pro: Qwen3.6-35B-A3B scored 49.5%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 57.6%. Qwen3.7 Plus wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricQwen3.6-35B-A3BQwen3.7 PlusComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensQwen3.6-35B-A3BNot availableQwen3.7 PlusNot availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondQwen3.6-35B-A3BNot availableQwen3.7 PlusNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenQwen3.6-35B-A3BNot availableQwen3.7 PlusNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensQwen3.6-35B-A3B262KQwen3.7 Plus1MQwen3.7 Plus lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticQwen3.7 Plus wins
BenchmarkQwen3.6-35B-A3BQwen3.7 PlusResult
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 51.5%70.3%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
Claw-EvalSource 68.7%62.7%Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads
QwenClawBenchSource 52.6%61.8%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
QwenWebBenchSource 13971536Qwen3.7 Plus leads
τ³-bench resultsSource 67.2%Not comparable
VITA-BenchSource 35.6%45.6%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
DeepPlanningSource 25.9%62.3%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
ToolathlonSource 26.9%Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource 62.8%73.2%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
WideResearchSource 60.1%Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 21.4%20.8%Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads
τ²-bench resultsSource 95.3%93%Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads
GDPval-AASource 27.4%21.8%Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads
GDPval-AASource 1049936Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads
Gert LabsSource 42.65%Not comparable
BFCL v4Source 72.9%Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 73.3%Not comparable
AndroidWorldSource 81.0%Not comparable
APEX-Agents-AASource 22.4%Not comparable
OSWorld 2.0Source 2.8%Not comparable
CodingQwen3.7 Plus wins
BenchmarkQwen3.6-35B-A3BQwen3.7 PlusResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 73.4%77.7%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
SWE MultilingualSource 67.2%75.8%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
SWE-bench ProSource 49.5%57.6%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 51.5%70.3%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
LiveCodeBenchSource 80.4%89.6%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
NL2RepoSource 29.4%41.1%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
AA Coding IndexSource 41.9%55.9%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
AA-SciCodeSource 35.8%45.5%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
SciCodeSource 51.3%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkQwen3.6-35B-A3BQwen3.7 PlusResult
AA-LCRSource 63.7%65.0%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
CritPtSource 0.3%9.1%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
MRCRv2Source 91.7%Not comparable
KnowledgeQwen3.7 Plus wins
BenchmarkQwen3.6-35B-A3BQwen3.7 PlusResult
MMLU-ProSource 85.2%88.5%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
SuperGPQASource 64.7%71.4%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
C-EvalSource 90%Not comparable
GPQASource 86%90.3%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
HLESource 21.4%34.7%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 31.6%39.0%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 84.1%90.0%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
AA-HLESource 20.2%33.4%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -21.4%2.4%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 18.9%22.2%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 49.7%25.5%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
GPQA-DSource 90.3%Not comparable
MMLU-ReduxSource 94.5%Not comparable
MMMLUSource 89.0%Not comparable
MathQwen3.7 Plus wins
BenchmarkQwen3.6-35B-A3BQwen3.7 PlusResult
HMMT Feb 2025Source 90.7%Not comparable
HMMT Nov 2025Source 89.1%Not comparable
HMMT Feb 2026Source 83.6%92.9%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
MMAnswerBenchSource 78.9%Not comparable
AIME26Source 92.7%Not comparable
IMOAnswerBenchSource 86.0%Not comparable
ApexSource 22.7%Not comparable
Multilingual
BenchmarkQwen3.6-35B-A3BQwen3.7 PlusResult
MMLU-ProXSource 85.4%Not comparable
NOVA-63Source 58.8%Not comparable
INCLUDESource 83.0%Not comparable
MAXIFESource 88.8%Not comparable
PolyMathSource 84.0%Not comparable
MultimodalQwen3.7 Plus wins
BenchmarkQwen3.6-35B-A3BQwen3.7 PlusResult
MMMUSource 81.7%Not comparable
MMMU-ProSource 75.3%79%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
RealWorldQASource 85.3%86.9%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
OmniDocBench 1.5Source 89.9%91.4%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
CharXivSource 78%85.9%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
SimpleVQASource 58.9%81.7%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
CC-OCRSource 81.9%Not comparable
AI2D_TESTSource 92.7%Not comparable
RefCOCO (avg)Source 92.0%Not comparable
ODINW13Source 50.8%51.1%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
Video-MME (with subtitle)Source 86.6%88.0%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
Video-MME (w/o subtitle)Source 82.5%Not comparable
VideoMMMUSource 83.7%85.4%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
MLVU (M-Avg)Source 86.2%87.4%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
AA-MMMU-ProSource 75.0%80.5%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
MathVisionSource 90.3%Not comparable
ERQASource 69.8%Not comparable
MedXpertQA (MM)Source 71.0%Not comparable
ScreenSpot ProSource 79.0%Not comparable
MMSearch-PlusSource 41.4%Not comparable
OCRBench V2Source 70.7%Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1288Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkQwen3.6-35B-A3BQwen3.7 PlusResult
AA-IFBenchSource 64.4%78.0%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
IFEvalSource 94.6%Not comparable
IFBenchSource 79.1%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (6)

Which is better, Qwen3.6-35B-A3B or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 67.22 to 51.47. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 51.5% and 70.3%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, Qwen3.6-35B-A3B or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 60.1 versus 51.4. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Hallucination Rate is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for coding, Qwen3.6-35B-A3B or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 75.6 versus 73.8. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for math, Qwen3.6-35B-A3B or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 92.9 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, Qwen3.6-35B-A3B or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 71.7 versus 51.5. Inside this category, QwenWebBench is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Qwen3.6-35B-A3B or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 81.5 versus 76.3. Inside this category, SimpleVQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 23, 2026

Choose a model with this week’s evidence

Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.

One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.