Coding
Directional only- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- 73.8
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- 62.5
- Weighted basis
- 3 vs 1 rows
- Reading
- Directional only
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Updated August 26, 2026. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty. They are not guarantees for a specific workload.
Decision reading
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next has the higher public score estimate, 67.54 versus 51.44, but the 90% score intervals overlap. Treat that as a lead, not a settled winner.
7 results are shared. Category rows based on different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.
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
The category averages use different weighted benchmark sets, so they are directional rather than like-for-like.
Confidence: limited
Agentic work
Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion
Not enough matched evidence
No shared weighted benchmark basis supports a winner.
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: listed-rates
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
What is actually comparable
Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.
34 Qwen3.6-35B-A3B only
7 Shared
17 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next only
- Shared results
- 7
- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B only
- 34
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next only
- 17
- Like-for-like categories
- 0 / 8
3 categories use different evidence sets. Those rows remain visible for coverage context but do not name a winner.
Category results, on a stated basis
Each row states whether both averages use the same weighted benchmark set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner in this template.
Knowledge
Directional only- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- 51.4
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- 43.4
- Weighted basis
- 4 vs 2 rows
- Reading
- Directional only
Multimodal
Directional only- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- 76.3
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- 90.6
- Weighted basis
- 2 vs 1 rows
- Reading
- Directional only
Agentic
Not comparable- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- 51.5
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Not measured
- Weighted basis
- 1 vs 0 rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Reasoning
Not comparable- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- Not measured
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Not measured
- Weighted basis
- 0 vs 0 rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Math
Not comparable- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- 88.2
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Not measured
- Weighted basis
- 2 vs 0 rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Multilingual
Not comparable- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- Not measured
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Not measured
- Weighted basis
- 0 vs 0 rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Instruction following
Not comparable- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- Not measured
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- 81.3
- Weighted basis
- 0 vs 1 rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
| Category | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B | Qwen3.8-Flash-Next | Weighted basis | Reading |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 73.8 | 62.5 | Directional only3 vs 1 rows | Directional only |
| Knowledge | 51.4 | 43.4 | Directional only4 vs 2 rows | Directional only |
| Multimodal | 76.3 | 90.6 | Directional only2 vs 1 rows | Directional only |
| Agentic | 51.5 | Not measured | Not comparable1 vs 0 rows | Not comparable |
| Reasoning | Not measured | Not measured | Not comparable0 vs 0 rows | Not comparable |
| Math | 88.2 | Not measured | Not comparable2 vs 0 rows | Not comparable |
| Multilingual | Not measured | Not measured | Not comparable0 vs 0 rows | Not comparable |
| Instruction following | Not measured | 81.3 | Not comparable0 vs 1 rows | Not comparable |
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.
Too few matched category axes support a radar. The ruled list below shows only shared benchmark results; positions use each benchmark’s normalized display scale when available.
HLE
Knowledge
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B: 21.4%Qwen3.8-Flash-Next: 35.9%Normalized gap 14.5Qwen3.6-35B-A3B source Qwen3.8-Flash-Next sourceSWE-bench Pro
Coding
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B: 49.5%Qwen3.8-Flash-Next: 62.5%Normalized gap 13.0Qwen3.6-35B-A3B source Qwen3.8-Flash-Next sourceCharXiv
Multimodal
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B: 78%Qwen3.8-Flash-Next: 90.6%Normalized gap 12.6Qwen3.6-35B-A3B source Qwen3.8-Flash-Next sourceGPQA
Knowledge
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B: 86%Qwen3.8-Flash-Next: 91.7%Normalized gap 5.7Qwen3.6-35B-A3B source Qwen3.8-Flash-Next source
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
- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- API rate not published
- Fits in one request
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
- Fits in one request
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B has no comparable published API token rate. Qwen3.8-Flash-Next has no comparable published API token rate.
Repository review
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- API rate not published
- Fits in one request
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
- Fits in one request
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B has no comparable published API token rate. Qwen3.8-Flash-Next has no comparable published API token rate.
Cache-heavy agent loop
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- API rate not published
- Fits in one request
- Cached-input rate unavailable
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
- Fits in one request
- Cached-input rate unavailable
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B has no comparable published API token rate. Qwen3.8-Flash-Next has no comparable published API token rate.
Specification differences
Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.
SpecificationQwen3.6-35B-A3BQwen3.8-Flash-Next
Context window
Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
262K
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
API model ID
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
Not sourced
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Qwen/Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next model cardCached-input rate
A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
No comparable hosted API rate
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
No comparable hosted API rate
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next model cardDocumented inputs
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
Not sourced
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Not sourced
Documented outputs
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
Not sourced
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Not sourced
Provider availability
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
Not sourced
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Not sourced
Reasoning profile
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
Reasoning
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Reasoning
Weight access
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
Open Weight
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Open Weight
License
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
Open Weight
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Open Weight
Release date
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
2026-04-15
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
2026-08-26
If you already use one of these models
- Deployment change
- Both entries list Alibaba as the provider. Confirm endpoint, model ID, limits, and feature support before switching.
- Quality signal
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next has the higher public score estimate, 67.54 versus 51.44, but the 90% score intervals overlap.
- Workload cost
- A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
- Context tradeoff
- Both models list 262K.
Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.
Benchmark evidence
The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.
Browse raw public benchmark evidence58 rows
Agentic
Terminal-Bench 2.0
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B51.5%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next—Not directly comparable
Claw-Eval
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B68.7%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next—Not directly comparable
QwenClawBench
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B52.6%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next—Not directly comparable
QwenWebBench
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B1397SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next—Not directly comparable
τ³-bench results
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B67.2%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next—Not directly comparable
VITA-Bench
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B35.6%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next—Not directly comparable
DeepPlanning
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B25.9%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next—Not directly comparable
Toolathlon
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B26.9%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next—Not directly comparable
MCP Atlas
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B62.8%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next—Not directly comparable
WideResearch
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B60.1%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next—Not directly comparable
Gert Labs
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B42.65%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next—Not directly comparable
CoWorkBench
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B—Qwen3.8-Flash-Next73.9%SourceNot directly comparable
JobBench
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B—Qwen3.8-Flash-Next55.7%SourceNot directly comparable
Agents' Last Exam
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B—Qwen3.8-Flash-Next51.2%SourceNot directly comparable
Toolathlon-Verified
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B—Qwen3.8-Flash-Next73.5%SourceNot directly comparable
AndroidWorld
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B—Qwen3.8-Flash-Next84.5%SourceNot directly comparable
OSWorld 2.0
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B—Qwen3.8-Flash-Next19.4%SourceNot directly comparable
Coding
SWE-bench Verified
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B73.4%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next—Not directly comparable
SWE Multilingual
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B67.2%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next81%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next leads this result
SWE-bench Pro
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B49.5%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next62.5%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next leads this result
Terminal-Bench 2.0
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B51.5%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next—Not directly comparable
LiveCodeBench
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B80.4%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next—Not directly comparable
NL2Repo
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B29.4%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next48.1%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next leads this result
deepSwe
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B—Qwen3.8-Flash-Next58.7%SourceNot directly comparable
LiveCodeBench v6
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B—Qwen3.8-Flash-Next91.9%SourceNot directly comparable
Knowledge
MMLU-Pro
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B85.2%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next—Not directly comparable
SuperGPQA
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B64.7%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next—Not directly comparable
C-Eval
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B90%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next—Not directly comparable
GPQA
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B86%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next91.7%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next leads this result
HLE
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B21.4%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next35.9%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next leads this result
GPQA-D
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B—Qwen3.8-Flash-Next91.7%SourceNot directly comparable
HLE w/o tools
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B—Qwen3.8-Flash-Next35.9%SourceNot directly comparable
Math
HMMT Feb 2025
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B90.7%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next—Not directly comparable
HMMT Nov 2025
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B89.1%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next—Not directly comparable
HMMT Feb 2026
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B83.6%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next—Not directly comparable
MMAnswerBench
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B78.9%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next—Not directly comparable
AIME26
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B92.7%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next—Not directly comparable
Multimodal
MMMU
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B81.7%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next—Not directly comparable
MMMU-Pro
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B75.3%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next—Not directly comparable
RealWorldQA
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B85.3%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next88.5%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next leads this result
OmniDocBench 1.5
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B89.9%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next—Not directly comparable
CharXiv
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B78%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next90.6%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next leads this result
SimpleVQA
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B58.9%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next—Not directly comparable
CC-OCR
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B81.9%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next—Not directly comparable
AI2D_TEST
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B92.7%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next—Not directly comparable
RefCOCO (avg)
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B92.0%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next—Not directly comparable
ODINW13
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B50.8%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next—Not directly comparable
Video-MME (with subtitle)
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B86.6%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next—Not directly comparable
Video-MME (w/o subtitle)
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B82.5%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next—Not directly comparable
VideoMMMU
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B83.7%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next—Not directly comparable
MLVU (M-Avg)
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B86.2%SourceQwen3.8-Flash-Next—Not directly comparable
Vision2Web
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B—Qwen3.8-Flash-Next64.0%SourceNot directly comparable
ERQA
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B—Qwen3.8-Flash-Next72.3%SourceNot directly comparable
LVBench
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B—Qwen3.8-Flash-Next76.6%SourceNot directly comparable
MathVision
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B—Qwen3.8-Flash-Next90.6%SourceNot directly comparable
MathVision w/ Python
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B—Qwen3.8-Flash-Next95.7%SourceNot directly comparable
CharXiv w/o tools
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B—Qwen3.8-Flash-Next84.6%SourceNot directly comparable
Instruction following
IFBench
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B—Qwen3.8-Flash-Next81.3%SourceNot directly comparable
Frequently asked questions
Which is better, Qwen3.6-35B-A3B or Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next has the higher public score estimate, 67.54 versus 51.44, but the 90% score intervals overlap. The higher estimate is not a decisive winner because the uncertainty ranges overlap.
Which is better for coding, Qwen3.6-35B-A3B or Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?
The current coding averages use different weighted benchmark sets, so BenchLM does not name a winner from them. Read the shared benchmark rows directly and test the models on the same task set.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Qwen3.6-35B-A3B or Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?
The published evidence does not provide a shared weighted agentic tasks basis for both models, so BenchLM does not name a agentic tasks winner.
Which costs less, Qwen3.6-35B-A3B or Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?
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, Qwen3.6-35B-A3B or Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?
Both models list the same context window, 262K.
Related comparisons
Last updated August 26, 2026
Watch Qwen3.6-35B-A3B vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.
Read a sample issueJoin 2,000+ readers.