Model comparison
Claude 3.5 Sonnet vs Qwen3.6 27B
Qwen3.6 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.2 to 34.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 4 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 3.5 Sonnet scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.6 27B in 4 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.6 27B leads 48.5 to 19.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 8.5% for Claude 3.5 Sonnet and 91.1% for Qwen3.6 27B.
- Qwen3.6 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Qwen3.6 27B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 34.6 | 42.2 |
| Released | 2024-06-20 | 2026-04-22 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 262K |
| Max output | — | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.60 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $3.60 |
| Results tracked | 60 | 11 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 39.0 (#165), Qwen3.6 27B: 39.1 (#163)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 51.6% | — |
| SciCode | — | 37.3% |
| GSO | 4.6% | — |
| WeirdML | 40% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 46.8% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 67.1% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1342 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 58.6% | — |
| CadEval | 48% | — |
| HumanEval+ | 81.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 74.3% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 32.3 (#67), Qwen3.6 27B: —
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| TheAgentCompany | 24% | — |
| Cybench | 17.5% | — |
| BALROG | 32.6% | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 45.2% | — |
Reasoning Qwen3.6 27B leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 23.1 (#183), Qwen3.6 27B: 25.0 (#153)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| DTBench | 67.8% | 78.1% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 133.55 | 146.5 |
| SimpleBench | 41.4% | — |
| CritPt | — | 0.9% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 22% |
| EnigmaEval | 0.9% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 56.7% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1305 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 7% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 55% | — |
| LMCA | — | 34.5% |
| ForecastBench | 60.7 | — |
| LiveBench | 59% | — |
Math Qwen3.6 27B leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 19.2 (#288), Qwen3.6 27B: 48.5 (#62)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 8.5% | 91.1% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 35.1% |
| Omni-MATH | 27.6% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 52.3% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1307 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 56.9% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 2.1% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 0% | — |
Knowledge Qwen3.6 27B leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 28.6 (#245), Qwen3.6 27B: 52.4 (#63)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 55.3% | 85.9% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 4.1% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 77.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 19.9% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 56.5% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1265 | — |
| MMLU | 87.3% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 26.5 (#120), Qwen3.6 27B: —
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1125 | — |
| Video-MME | 60% | — |
| GeoBench | 62% | — |
| VPCT | 33% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 43.2 (#185), Qwen3.6 27B: —
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1283 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1272 | — |
| LMArena French | 1305 | — |
| LMArena German | 1297 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1234 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1200 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1306 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1290 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 68.8 (#182), Qwen3.6 27B: —
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 69.3% | — |
| IFEval | 85.5% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1297 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 39.9 (#167), Qwen3.6 27B: —
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1311 | — |
Writing & Preference Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 52.9 (#164), Qwen3.6 27B: 50.3 (#181)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1298 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1292 | — |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 80.3% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1451 | — |
| WildBench | 79.2% | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1026 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1326 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 53.8% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude 3.5 Sonnet better than Qwen3.6 27B?
Qwen3.6 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.2 to 34.6 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude 3.5 Sonnet or Qwen3.6 27B better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (39.0 vs 39.1); test both on your own repository before choosing.
How many benchmarks do Claude 3.5 Sonnet and Qwen3.6 27B share?
4 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 3.5 Sonnet has 60 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 27B has 11.