Model comparison

Hy3 vs Qwen3.6 35B-A3B

Hy3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.6 to 37.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

Hy3 Tencent

43.6

Rank #79 Confirmed

Qwen3.6 35B-A3B Alibaba (Qwen)

37.2

Rank #194 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Hy3 scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.6 35B-A3B in 3 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.6 35B-A3B leads 51.4 to 40.2.
  • Hy3 is cheaper at $0.13 / $0.53 per million input/output tokens, against $0.25 / $1.49 for Qwen3.6 35B-A3B.

Side by side

Hy3 and Qwen3.6 35B-A3B specifications
Hy3Qwen3.6 35B-A3B
ProviderTencentAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index43.637.2
Released2026-07-062026-04-01
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window262K262K
Max output128K66K
Input $ / M tokens$0.13$0.25
Output $ / M tokens$0.53$1.49
Results tracked1714

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Hy3 leads

Hy3: 46.6 (#60), Qwen3.6 35B-A3B: 36.7 (#190)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkHy3Qwen3.6 35B-A3B
LMArena WebDev1509—
SciCode—35.8%
WeirdML—34.5%
LMArena Coding1465—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Hy3: —, Qwen3.6 35B-A3B: 21.9 (#126)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkHy3Qwen3.6 35B-A3B
Terminal-Bench—23%

Reasoning Qwen3.6 35B-A3B leads

Hy3: 25.0 (#134), Qwen3.6 35B-A3B: 27.2 (#112)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkHy3Qwen3.6 35B-A3B
NYT Connections (extended)41.2%41.6%
CritPt—0.3%
Chess Puzzles—26%
LMArena Hard Prompts1449—
Mystery Game Puzzles—22%
DTBench—73.9%
LMCA—29.7%
Surface Evolver Bench—44.4%
Epoch Capabilities Index—143.92

Math Too close to call

Hy3: 37.4 (#98), Qwen3.6 35B-A3B: 37.9 (#90)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkHy3Qwen3.6 35B-A3B
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—20.4%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—86.7%
LMArena Math1475—

Knowledge Qwen3.6 35B-A3B leads

Hy3: 40.2 (#108), Qwen3.6 35B-A3B: 51.4 (#63)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkHy3Qwen3.6 35B-A3B
GPQA Diamond—84.8%
LMArena Expert1461—

Multilingual Not comparable

Hy3: 53.7 (#60), Qwen3.6 35B-A3B: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkHy3Qwen3.6 35B-A3B
LMArena Non-English1427—
LMArena Chinese1496—
LMArena French1461—
LMArena Korean1390—
LMArena Russian1435—
LMArena Spanish1448—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Hy3: 75.3 (#68), Qwen3.6 35B-A3B: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkHy3Qwen3.6 35B-A3B
LMArena Instruction Following1425—

Long Context Not comparable

Hy3: 44.1 (#70), Qwen3.6 35B-A3B: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkHy3Qwen3.6 35B-A3B
LMArena Longer Query1443—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Hy3: 62.5 (#75), Qwen3.6 35B-A3B: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkHy3Qwen3.6 35B-A3B
LMArena Text1442—
LMArena Creative Writing1399—
LMArena Multi-Turn1436—

Frequently asked questions

Is Hy3 better than Qwen3.6 35B-A3B?

Hy3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.6 to 37.2 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Hy3 or Qwen3.6 35B-A3B?

Hy3 is cheaper. It lists at $0.13 per million input tokens and $0.53 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 35B-A3B lists at $0.25 and $1.49.

Is Hy3 or Qwen3.6 35B-A3B better for coding?

Hy3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 46.6 versus 36.7 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Both accept 262K tokens.

How many benchmarks do Hy3 and Qwen3.6 35B-A3B share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. Hy3 has 17 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 35B-A3B has 14.

Related comparisons

Go deeper