Model comparison
Qwen3.6 Plus vs Step 3.7 Flash
Head-to-head evidence from 24 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Verified leaderboard positions: Qwen3.6 Plus #14; Step 3.7 Flash unranked
BenchAlign evidence: Qwen3.6 Plus supported; Step 3.7 Flash estimated. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Qwen3.6 Plus and Step 3.7 Flash share 24 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 37 results are unique to Qwen3.6 Plus; 6 to Step 3.7 Flash.
Updated July 16, 2026- Shared results
- 24
- Qwen3.6 Plus only
- 37
- Step 3.7 Flash only
- 6
- Comparable categories
- 2 / 8
Pick Qwen3.6 Plus if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Step 3.7 Flash only becomes the better choice if agentic is the priority.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 24 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 2 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Qwen3.6 Plus is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 63 to 57. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Qwen3.6 Plus's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 70.3 against 56.3. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 61.6% to 59.5%. Step 3.7 Flash does hit back in agentic, 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 256K for Step 3.7 Flash.
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 | Qwen3.6 Plus | Δ | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | Qwen3.6 Plus70.3 | Margin← 14.0 | Step 3.7 Flash56.3 |
| Agentic | Qwen3.6 Plus61.6 | Margin→ 4.8 | Step 3.7 Flash66.4 |
| Reasoning | Qwen3.6 Plus62.0 | MarginNo overlap | Step 3.7 FlashNot measured |
| Knowledge | Qwen3.6 Plus57.5 | MarginNo overlap | Step 3.7 FlashNot measured |
| Math | Qwen3.6 Plus60.5 | MarginNo overlap | Step 3.7 FlashNot measured |
| Multilingual | Qwen3.6 Plus84.7 | MarginNo overlap | Step 3.7 FlashNot measured |
| Multimodal | Qwen3.6 Plus79.8 | MarginNo overlap | Step 3.7 FlashNot measured |
| Inst. Following | Qwen3.6 Plus82.3 | MarginNo overlap | Step 3.7 FlashNot measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 61.6%B 59.5%Winner: Qwen3.6 PlusΔ 2.1Terminal-Bench 2.0: Qwen3.6 Plus scored 61.6%; Step 3.7 Flash scored 59.5%. Qwen3.6 Plus wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Pro
CodingA 56.6%B 56.3%Winner: Qwen3.6 PlusΔ 0.3SWE-bench Pro: Qwen3.6 Plus scored 56.6%; Step 3.7 Flash scored 56.3%. Qwen3.6 Plus wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Qwen3.6 Plus | Step 3.7 Flash | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Qwen3.6 PlusNot available | Step 3.7 Flash$0.2 input / $1.15 output | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Qwen3.6 PlusNot available | Step 3.7 FlashNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Qwen3.6 PlusNot available | Step 3.7 FlashNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Qwen3.6 Plus1M | Step 3.7 Flash256K | Qwen3.6 Plus lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticStep 3.7 Flash wins20 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 Plus | Step 3.7 Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 61.6% | 59.5% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| Claw-EvalSource | 58.8% | 67.1% | Step 3.7 Flash leads |
| QwenClawBenchSource | 57.2% | — | Not comparable |
| τ³-bench resultsSource | 70.7% | — | Not comparable |
| VITA-BenchSource | 44.3% | — | Not comparable |
| DeepPlanningSource | 41.5% | — | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | 39.8% | 49.5% | Step 3.7 Flash leads |
| MCP AtlasSource | 48.2% | — | Not comparable |
| MCP-TasksSource | 74.1% | — | Not comparable |
| WideResearchSource | 74.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 27.6% | 21.5% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 97.7% | 98.5% | Step 3.7 Flash leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 31.8% | 25.9% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 1135 | 1017 | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| Gert LabsSource | 50.60% | 51.57% | Step 3.7 Flash leads |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | 18.0% | — | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | — | 75.8% | Not comparable |
| DeepSearchQASource | — | 92.8% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/ toolsSource | — | 47.2% | Not comparable |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | — | 14.8% | Not comparable |
CodingQwen3.6 Plus wins9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 Plus | Step 3.7 Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 78.8% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 56.6% | 56.3% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| SWE MultilingualSource | 73.8% | — | Not comparable |
| LiveCodeBench v6Source | 87.1% | — | Not comparable |
| Vibe Code BenchSource | 25.56% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 54.5% | 39.6% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| Terminal-Bench HardSource | 43.9% | 35.6% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 40.7% | 40.0% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 59.5% | Not comparable |
Reasoning4 benchmarks
Knowledge12 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 Plus | Step 3.7 Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 90.4% | — | Not comparable |
| SuperGPQASource | 71.6% | — | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ProSource | 88.5% | — | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ReduxSource | 94.5% | — | Not comparable |
| C-EvalSource | 93.3% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 28.8% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 39.6% | 30.3% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 88.2% | 80.9% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| AA-HLESource | 25.7% | 19.9% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 2.7% | -37.5% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 26.2% | 25.4% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 32.0% | 84.4% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
Math7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 Plus | Step 3.7 Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME26Source | 95.3% | — | Not comparable |
| HMMT Feb 2025Source | 96.7% | — | Not comparable |
| HMMT Nov 2025Source | 94.6% | — | Not comparable |
| HMMT Feb 2026Source | 87.8% | — | Not comparable |
| MMAnswerBenchSource | 83.8% | — | Not comparable |
| FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source | 26.207% | — | Not comparable |
| FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source | 8.333% | — | Not comparable |
Multilingual2 benchmarks
Multimodal10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 Plus | Step 3.7 Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMMUSource | 86.0% | — | Not comparable |
| MMMU-ProSource | 78.8% | — | Not comparable |
| MathVisionSource | 88.0% | — | Not comparable |
| VideoMMMUSource | 84.0% | — | Not comparable |
| ScreenSpot ProSource | 68.2% | — | Not comparable |
| CharXivSource | 81.5% | — | Not comparable |
| V*Source | 96.9% | 95.3% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | 78.0% | 75.3% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1254 | 1218 | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| SimpleVQASource | — | 79.2% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Which is better, Qwen3.6 Plus or Step 3.7 Flash?
Qwen3.6 Plus is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 63 to 57. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 61.6% and 59.5%.
Which is better for coding, Qwen3.6 Plus or Step 3.7 Flash?
Qwen3.6 Plus has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 70.3 versus 56.3. Inside this category, AA Coding Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Qwen3.6 Plus or Step 3.7 Flash?
Step 3.7 Flash has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 66.4 versus 61.6. Inside this category, GDPval-AA 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.