Noometry

Model comparison

Llama 3.1-405B vs Qwen3.6 Plus

Qwen3.6 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.3 to 30.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 21 shared benchmarks.

Llama 3.1-405B Meta

30.4

Rank #279 Confirmed

Qwen3.6 Plus Alibaba (Qwen)

47.3

Rank #54 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3.1-405B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.6 Plus in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.6 Plus leads 50.6 to 17.3.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 9.7% for Llama 3.1-405B and 93.3% for Qwen3.6 Plus.
  • Llama 3.1-405B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Llama 3.1-405BQwen3.6 Plus
ProviderMetaAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index30.447.3
Released2024-07-232026-03-31
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window—1M
Max output—66K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.50
Output $ / M tokens—$3
Results tracked4237

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.6 Plus leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 32.7 (#257), Qwen3.6 Plus: 40.6 (#125)

BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BQwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Coding12911467
SWE-bench Verified—57.9%
LMArena WebDev—1461
SciCode—40.7%
WeirdML21.4%—
ALE-Bench—670.15

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Llama 3.1-405B: 20.9 (#131), Qwen3.6 Plus: —

BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BQwen3.6 Plus
TheAgentCompany7.4%—
Cybench7.5%—
Vending-Bench 2—5,115

Reasoning Qwen3.6 Plus leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 16.4 (#293), Qwen3.6 Plus: 28.5 (#89)

BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BQwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Hard Prompts12701449
DTBench61.4%81.9%
Epoch Capabilities Index128.76147.67
SimpleBench23%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark45%—
NYT Connections (extended)—60.3%
CritPt—2.9%
Chess Puzzles—17%
Thematic Generalization—59.5%
Mystery Game Puzzles—12%
LMCA—33.1%
BIG-Bench Hard82.9%—
ForecastBench59.9—
HellaSwag89.2%—
PIQA85.9%—
WinoGrande89.2%—

Math Qwen3.6 Plus leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 17.3 (#283), Qwen3.6 Plus: 50.6 (#44)

BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BQwen3.6 Plus
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20259.7%93.3%
LMArena Math12811450
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—38.2%
Omni-MATH24.9%—
MATH Level 549.8%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—26.2%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—8.3%

Knowledge Qwen3.6 Plus leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 30.4 (#221), Qwen3.6 Plus: 56.1 (#40)

BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BQwen3.6 Plus
GPQA Diamond50.9%88.4%
LMArena Expert12431456
SimpleQA Verified—44.1%
MMLU-Pro72.3%—
Confabulations17.6%—
GPQA (HELM)52.2%—
ARC (AI2) Challenge95.3%—
MMLU84.5%—
TriviaQA82.7%—

Multilingual Qwen3.6 Plus leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 40.9 (#209), Qwen3.6 Plus: 53.5 (#66)

BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BQwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Non-English12481424
LMArena Chinese12421478
LMArena French12781454
LMArena German12521451
LMArena Japanese12081389
LMArena Korean11841381
LMArena Russian12651434
LMArena Spanish12591432

Instruction Following Qwen3.6 Plus leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 66.1 (#209), Qwen3.6 Plus: 75.2 (#70)

BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BQwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Instruction Following12591425
IFEval81.1%—

Long Context Qwen3.6 Plus leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 38.4 (#192), Qwen3.6 Plus: 45.1 (#48)

BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BQwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Longer Query12661440
CL-bench—20.3%

Writing & Preference Qwen3.6 Plus leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 39.1 (#246), Qwen3.6 Plus: 62.4 (#78)

BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BQwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text12841437
LMArena Creative Writing12621405
LMArena Multi-Turn12971438
EQ-Bench Creative Writing870—
WildBench78.3%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Llama 3.1-405B better than Qwen3.6 Plus?

Qwen3.6 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.3 to 30.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is Llama 3.1-405B or Qwen3.6 Plus better for coding?

Qwen3.6 Plus scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.6 versus 32.7 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Llama 3.1-405B and Qwen3.6 Plus share?

21 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.1-405B has 42 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Plus has 37.

Related comparisons

Go deeper