Data as of October 27, 2026 · How the score is built
Released Apr 20, 2026256K context
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)
Decision readingQwen 3.6 Max (preview) scores 55.5 out of 100 and ranks #76 of 230. This profile shows 8 source-displayable benchmark rows; its strongest eligible category is Coding at #62. No comparable first-party API price is published in the catalog.
Released Apr 20, 2026 — see all recent releases
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.
Capability
55.5/100
field median 50.2#76 of 230 ranked models
Public
#76of 230
Verified —
Price
Not listed
input median $0.75No comparable first-party hosted token rate
Speed
Not measured
field median 96 tok/sTime to first token not measured
Context
256Ktokens
field median 256,000Reported for this model; direct source link not stored
Strongest published evidence
Coding ranks #62. Particularly well-suited for software development and code generation tasks.
Validate before choosing
8 published rows leave some tracked benchmark slots empty. No comparable first-party API token rate is published.
Source-linked · 8 displayable benchmark rows
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 Not rankedWeight 22%2 benchmarksVerified | 65.5 | 2 benchmarks | Verified | |||
| CodingRank #62 of 155Percentile 60thWeight 20%5 benchmarksVerified | 42.8 | 5 benchmarks | Verified | |||
| ReasoningWeight 17%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | 0 benchmarks | Not measured | |||
| MultimodalWeight 12%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | 0 benchmarks | Not measured | |||
| KnowledgeRank Not rankedWeight 12%1 benchmarkVerified | 67.2 | 1 benchmark | Verified | |||
| MultilingualWeight 7%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | 0 benchmarks | Not measured | |||
| Inst. FollowingWeight 5%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | 0 benchmarks | Not measured | |||
| MathWeight 5%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
8 of 774 tracked benchmark slots have displayable evidence · bars run 0–100
Coverage detailsHow 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.
- Agentic2/2 verified
- Coding5/5 verified
- ReasoningNot measured
- MultimodalNot measured
- Knowledge1/1 verified
- MultilingualNot measured
- Inst. FollowingNot measured
- MathNot measured
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.
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) category percentile values
- AgenticNot eligible
- Coding60th percentile
- ReasoningNot eligible
- MultimodalNot eligible
- KnowledgeNot eligible
- MultilingualNot eligible
- Instruction followingNot eligible
- MathNot eligible
The dashed outline is median of 6 nearest peers.
Eligible category ranks
- AgenticNot ranked
- Coding#62/155
- ReasoningNot ranked
- MultimodalNot ranked
- KnowledgeNot ranked
- MultilingualNot ranked
- Inst. FollowingNot ranked
- MathNot ranked
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.
Coding5 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Pro | Score57.3% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5.5 · 89.9% | Gap32.6 behind | Weight26% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| SciCodeScientific Code Benchmark | Score47% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Sakana Fugu · 60.1% | Gap13.1 behind | Weight10% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | Score65.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-5.5 · 82.0% | Gap16.6 behind | WeightScored in Agentic | Provider exact |
| NL2Repo | Score42.9% | Versus best verified row Best verified: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 · 68.2% | Gap25.3 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| SWE-bench (Vals)SWE-bench, Vals AI run | Score72.8% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 97.0% | Gap24.2 behind | WeightDisplay only | Verified |
Agentic2 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | Score65.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-5.5 · 82% | Gap16.6 behind | Weight7% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| QwenClawBench | Score59.0% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.7 Max · 64.3% | Gap5.3 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
Knowledge1 row
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SuperGPQASuperGPQA: Scaling LLM Evaluation Across 285 Graduate Disciplines | Score73.9% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) · 73.9% | GapBest verified | Weight2% ref. weight | Provider exact |
Bars run 0–100; the dark tick marks the best source-verified value
All 8 rowsLineage
The sequence follows explicit supersedes links. Each score is estimated for that model; a relative can inform a sparse estimate but never sets a floor, so a newer release can score below an earlier one. Scores and prices remain blank when the corresponding public row or first-party rate is unavailable.
preview · preview
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
- 256K
- Maximum output
- Not sourced yet
- Knowledge cutoff
- Not sourced yet
- Input modalities
- Not sourced yet
- Output modalities
- Not sourced yet
- Parameters
- Not disclosed by the provider
- Availability
- Not sourced yet
- Cloud regions
- Not tracked yet
- Lifecycle
- Established
- API capabilities
- Tool calling, structured outputs, and batch support are not tracked yet
- Prompt caching
- Not documented in the pricing record
- Self-host
- Weights are not published
- Rate limits
- Not tracked yet
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.
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) ranks #76 of 230 on the public leaderboard with a score of 55.48/100. It does not yet have enough sourced coverage for a verified position.
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) is a proprietary model with a 256K context window. It uses an explicit reasoning mode, which can improve complex problem solving while adding latency and token use.
8 of 774 tracked benchmark slots currently have displayable evidence. Missing categories stay blank.
Its strongest eligible category is Coding at #62. particularly well-suited for software development and code generation tasks.
Last updated October 27, 2026. Runtime fields remain blank until a sourced snapshot exists.
Questions
How does Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) perform overall in AI benchmarks?
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) ranks #76 out of 230 models on the public BenchAlign leaderboard, with a score of 55.48/100. Its evidence status is Estimated, and this profile shows 8 source-displayable benchmark rows. The label describes evidence depth, not a provider quality claim; inspect category rows before choosing a workload.
Is Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) good for knowledge and understanding?
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) has source-displayable benchmark coverage for knowledge and understanding, 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 Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) good for coding and programming?
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) ranks #62 out of 155 eligible models for coding and programming, with a public category score of 42.8/100. 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 Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) good for agentic tool use and computer tasks?
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) has source-displayable benchmark coverage for agentic tool use and computer tasks, 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.
Does Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) have full benchmark coverage on BenchLM?
No. Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) currently has 20 source-displayable rows. 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 Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)?
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) has a reported context window of 256K 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.