Capability
52.7/100
field median 58.1
#113 of 232 ranked models
Superseded.Alibaba has newer models in this line:Qwen3.8-27B
Qwen3.6-27B
Released Apr 21, 2026 — see all recent releases
Decision reading
Qwen3.6-27B scores 52.7 out of 100 and ranks #113 of 232. This profile shows 38 source-displayable benchmark rows; its strongest eligible category is Multimodal & Grounded at #35. Published weights can be self-hosted, but infrastructure cost varies and is not a comparable API token rate.
Data as of September 4, 2026 · How the score is built
Share or export
Strongest published evidence
Multimodal & Grounded ranks #35. Particularly strong for screenshots, documents, charts, and grounded multimodal workflows.
Validate before choosing
38 published rows leave some tracked benchmark slots empty. No comparable first-party API token rate is published.
Decision snapshot
Each value carries a field reference instead of floating alone. Markers compare this model with the current ranked and priced catalog; they are not absolute quality thresholds.
Price
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
input median $1
No comparable first-party hosted token rate
Speed
53tok/s
field median 92 tok/s
First token 110.48 s
Context
262Ktokens
field median 256,000
Reported for this model; direct source link not stored
Capability shape
Each axis shows percentile within that category’s eligible cohort. The comparison outline is the median of the six nearest public-score peers; a collapsed vertex means the category is not rank-eligible.
Qwen3.6-27B category percentile values
- Agentic12th percentile
- Coding30th percentile
- ReasoningNot eligible
- Knowledge48th percentile
- MathNot eligible
- MultilingualNot eligible
- Multimodal28th percentile
- Instruction followingNot eligible
The dashed outline is median of 6 nearest peers.
Eligible category ranks
- Agentic#133/151
- Coding#128/183
- ReasoningNot ranked
- Knowledge#95/181
- MathNot ranked
- MultilingualNot ranked
- Multimodal#35/48
- Inst. FollowingNot ranked
Top decileTop quartileMid-fieldNot eligible
How much of this is verified
Coverage is split by category so a strong number never hides a thin evidence base. Verified means the row is tied to a published source; provisional rows remain visible but separate.
- Agentic6/6 verified
- Coding6/6 verified
- ReasoningNot measured
- Knowledge6/6 verified
- Math5/5 verified
- MultilingualNot measured
- Multimodal15/15 verified
- Inst. FollowingNot measured
Verified sourceProvisionalNot measured
Spec sheet
Each documented value carries its source. Missing fields stay visible as not sourced or not published, rather than disappearing from the page.
- API model ID
- Not published
- Context window
- 262K
- Maximum output
- Not sourced yet
- Knowledge cutoff
- Not sourced yet
- Input modalities
- Not sourced yet
- Output modalities
- Not sourced yet
- Parameters
- Not sourced yet
- Availability
- Not sourced yet
- Cloud regions
- Not tracked yet
- Lifecycle
- Superseded
- API capabilities
- Tool calling, structured outputs, and batch support are not tracked yet
- Prompt caching
- Not documented in the pricing record
- Self-host
- Qwen3.6-27B needs ~24GB VRAM (1× NVIDIA RTX 4090 (24GB)).
- Rate limits
- Not tracked yet
Deployment options
Self-host and provider-specific paths stay separate from benchmark evidence so operating constraints are visible before a score becomes the whole decision.
Self-host vs API cost
Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.
Qwen3.6-27B
API / mo$0
Self-host / mo$429
Break-even—
Category score record
Scores and ranks appear only where published evidence can be displayed. The table keeps the score, weight, cohort, and evidence state together.
| Category | Score | Rank | Percentile | Weight | Benchmarks | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AgenticRank #133 of 151Percentile 12thWeight 22%6 benchmarksVerified | 33.9 | #133 of 151 | 12th | 22% | 6 benchmarks | Verified |
| CodingRank #128 of 183Percentile 30thWeight 20%6 benchmarksVerified | 42.6 | #128 of 183 | 30th | 20% | 6 benchmarks | Verified |
| ReasoningWeight 17%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | Not ranked | Not available | 17% | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
| KnowledgeRank #95 of 181Percentile 48thWeight 12%6 benchmarksVerified | 49.0 | #95 of 181 | 48th | 12% | 6 benchmarks | Verified |
| MathRank Not rankedWeight 5%5 benchmarksVerified | 72.8 | Not ranked | Not available | 5% | 5 benchmarks | Verified |
| MultilingualWeight 7%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | Not ranked | Not available | 7% | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
| MultimodalRank #35 of 48Percentile 28thWeight 12%15 benchmarksVerified | 51.5 | #35 of 48 | 28th | 12% | 15 benchmarks | Verified |
| Inst. FollowingWeight 5%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | Not ranked | Not available | 5% | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
Benchmark ledger
Coding opens by default. The marker compares each value with the best source-verified result in the catalog; provisional leaders do not set the reference. Expand the remaining categories for every published row.
Coding6 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Pro | Score53.5% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Fable 5.1 · 81.2% | Gap27.7 behind | WeightWeighted 25% | Provider exact |
| LiveCodeBenchLiveCodeBench: Holistic and Contamination Free Evaluation of Large Language Models for Code | Score83.9% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.7 Max · 91.6% | Gap7.7 behind | WeightWeighted 15% | Provider exact |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSoftware Engineering Benchmark Verified | Score77.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 96% | Gap18.8 behind | WeightWeighted 10% | Provider exact |
| SWE Multilingual | Score71.3% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 89.5% | Gap18.2 behind | WeightWeighted 5% | Provider exact |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | Score59.3% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-5.6 Sol · 91.9% | Gap32.6 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| NL2Repo | Score36.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 · 61.5% | Gap25.3 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
Agentic6 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | Score59.3% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-5.6 Sol · 91.9% | Gap32.6 behind | WeightWeighted 30% | Provider exact |
| Claw-Eval | Score72.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Ornith-1.5-397B · 81.4% | Gap9 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| QwenClawBench | Score53.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.7 Max · 64.3% | Gap10.9 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| QwenWebBench | Score1487 | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.7 Max · 1568 | Gap81 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| AndroidWorld | Score70.3% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 85.3% | Gap15 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| Gert LabsGert Labs Composite Game Benchmark | Score54.84% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 4.8 · 72.97% | Gap18.1 behind | WeightDisplay only | Benchmark exact |
Knowledge6 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HLEHumanity's Last Exam | Score24% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Fable 5.1 · 65% | Gap41 behind | WeightWeighted 35% | Provider exact |
| MMLU-ProMassive Multitask Language Understanding Professional | Score86.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.7 Max · 89.6% | Gap3.4 behind | WeightWeighted 20% | Provider exact |
| SuperGPQASuperGPQA: Scaling LLM Evaluation Across 285 Graduate Disciplines | Score66% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) · 73.9% | Gap7.9 behind | WeightWeighted 7% | Provider exact |
| GPQAGraduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A | Score87.8% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 96% | Gap8.2 behind | WeightWeighted 7% | Provider exact |
| MMLU-Redux | Score93.5% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.7 Max · 95% | Gap1.5 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| C-Eval | Score91.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.6 Plus · 93.3% | Gap1.9 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
Math5 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HMMT Feb 2026Harvard-MIT Mathematics Tournament February 2026 | Score84.3% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.7 Max · 97.1% | Gap12.8 behind | WeightWeighted 25% | Provider exact |
| AIME26AIME 2026 | Score94.1% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GLM-5.2 · 99.2% | Gap5.1 behind | WeightWeighted 25% | Provider exact |
| HMMT Feb 2025Harvard-MIT Mathematics Tournament February 2025 | Score93.8% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.6 Plus · 96.7% | Gap2.9 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| HMMT Nov 2025Harvard-MIT Mathematics Tournament November 2025 | Score90.7% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.6 Plus · 94.6% | Gap3.9 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| MMAnswerBench | Score80.8% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GLM-5.2 · 91.0% | Gap10.2 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
Multimodal15 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MMMU-ProMassive Multi-discipline Multimodal Understanding Pro | Score75.8% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-5.4 Pro · 94% | Gap18.2 behind | WeightWeighted 40% | Provider exact |
| CharXivCharXiv Reasoning | Score78.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 93.5% | Gap15.1 behind | WeightWeighted 20% | Provider exact |
| MMMUMassive Multi-discipline Multimodal Understanding | Score82.9% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.6-27B · 82.9% | GapBest verified | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| RealWorldQA | Score84.1% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.8-Flash-Next · 88.5% | Gap4.4 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| DynaMath | Score85.6% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.6-27B · 85.6% | GapBest verified | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| MStar | Score81.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.6-27B · 81.4% | GapBest verified | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| SimpleVQA | Score56.1% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.7 Plus · 81.7% | Gap25.6 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| CC-OCR | Score81.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.6-35B-A3B · 81.9% | Gap0.7 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| CountBench | Score97.8% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.6-27B · 97.8% | GapBest verified | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| RefCOCO (avg)RefCOCO average | Score92.5% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.6-27B · 92.5% | GapBest verified | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| ERQA | Score62.5% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 77.8% | Gap15.3 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| Video-MME (with subtitle)Video-MME with subtitle | Score87.7% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 90.4% | Gap2.7 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| VideoMMMU | Score84.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 88.7% | Gap4.3 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| MLVU (M-Avg)MLVU mean average | Score86.6% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 90.8% | Gap4.2 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| V* | Score94.7% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Kimi K2.6 · 96.9% | Gap2.2 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
Lineage
The sequence follows explicit supersedes links. A successor's displayed score stays at least 0.1 points above its predecessor; raw benchmark rows do not move. Scores and prices remain blank when the corresponding public row or first-party rate is unavailable.
Apr 21, 2026 · you are here
Qwen3.6-27BScore 52.7 · Price not listed
Aug 5, 2026
Qwen3.8-27BScore 68.3 · Price not listed
Base entry
How to read this profile
The visual layer above carries the decisions. These notes preserve the model, ranking, coverage, and family context behind the numbers.
Qwen3.6-27B ranks #113 of 232 on the public leaderboard with a score of 52.73/100. It does not yet have enough sourced coverage for a verified position.
Qwen3.6-27B is a open weight model with a 262K context window. It uses an explicit reasoning mode, which can improve complex problem solving while adding latency and token use.
Official exact-value snapshot from the Qwen/Qwen3.6-27B Hugging Face model card. The public repository and FP8 checkpoint were created on April 21, 2026, and the model card states a native 262,144-token context window extensible to 1,010,000 tokens.
38 of 422 tracked benchmark slots currently have displayable evidence. Missing categories stay blank.
Its strongest eligible category is Multimodal & Grounded at #35, while its lowest eligible position is Agentic at #133. particularly strong for screenshots, documents, charts, and grounded multimodal workflows.
Radar
Full release historyQwen3.6-27B release history
Qwen3.6-27B released
Alibaba · Model release
Source confirmed
Radar confirmed these at the source. Already tracking Qwen3.6-27B? See the free Radar Brief for what changes next.
Frequently asked questions
How does Qwen3.6-27B perform overall in AI benchmarks?
Qwen3.6-27B ranks #113 out of 232 models on the public BenchAlign leaderboard, with a score of 52.73/100. Its evidence status is Estimated, and this profile shows 38 source-displayable benchmark rows. The label describes evidence depth, not a provider quality claim; inspect category rows before choosing a workload.
Is Qwen3.6-27B good for knowledge and understanding?
Qwen3.6-27B ranks #95 out of 181 eligible models for knowledge and understanding, with a public category score of 49/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Is Qwen3.6-27B good for coding and programming?
Qwen3.6-27B ranks #128 out of 183 eligible models for coding and programming, with a public category score of 42.6/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Is Qwen3.6-27B good for mathematics?
Qwen3.6-27B has source-displayable benchmark coverage for mathematics, but the public category table does not assign it a rank there. The individual rows remain available for inspection. A missing category position means the evidence threshold was not met; it does not convert the model's unmeasured work into a zero.
Is Qwen3.6-27B good for agentic tool use and computer tasks?
Qwen3.6-27B ranks #133 out of 151 eligible models for agentic tool use and computer tasks, with a public category score of 33.9/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Is Qwen3.6-27B good for multimodal and grounded tasks?
Qwen3.6-27B ranks #35 out of 48 eligible models for multimodal and grounded tasks, with a public category score of 51.5/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Is Qwen3.6-27B open source?
Qwen3.6-27B is an open-weight model from Alibaba. Its weights can be downloaded for local or hosted deployment, subject to the published license. Open weight does not automatically mean open source: training data and training code may remain private, and commercial restrictions can still apply.
Does Qwen3.6-27B have full benchmark coverage on BenchLM?
No. Qwen3.6-27B currently has 54 source-displayable rows across 422 tracked benchmark slots. The profile exposes published, non-generated evidence and leaves missing categories blank until an exact evaluation is available. Coverage describes how much was measured; it is not a penalty added to an individual benchmark result.
What is the context window size of Qwen3.6-27B?
Qwen3.6-27B has a reported context window of 262K in the exact-model catalog record. The value stays visible, but the profile marks its source link as unavailable instead of presenting it as directly documented. Maximum output length remains separate because providers often publish a different limit.
Compare Qwen3.6-27B with every tracked model410 comparisons
Last updated September 4, 2026. Runtime fields remain blank until a sourced snapshot exists.
Watch Qwen3.6-27B in the weekly brief
Get one weekly email when material rank, price, availability, or benchmark evidence changes are worth revisiting.
Read a sample issueJoin 2,000+ readers.