Noometry

Model comparison

Qwen Max vs Qwen3.6 Plus

Qwen3.6 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.5 to 34.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 20 shared benchmarks.

Qwen Max Alibaba (Qwen)

34.7

Rank #230 Confirmed

Qwen3.6 Plus Alibaba (Qwen)

47.5

Rank #62 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen Max 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 51.8 to 22.3.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 16.1% for Qwen Max and 93.3% for Qwen3.6 Plus.
  • Qwen3.6 Plus is cheaper at $0.50 / $3 per million input/output tokens, against $1.60 / $6.40 for Qwen Max.
  • Qwen3.6 Plus accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 33K.

Side by side

Qwen MaxQwen3.6 Plus
ProviderAlibaba (Qwen)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index34.747.5
Released2024-04-032026-03-31
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window33K1M
Max output8K66K
Input $ / M tokens$1.60$0.50
Output $ / M tokens$6.40$3
Results tracked2337

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.6 Plus leads

Qwen Max: 30.7 (#292), Qwen3.6 Plus: 40.8 (#130)

BenchmarkQwen MaxQwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Coding12881467
SWE-bench Verified—57.9%
Aider Polyglot21.8%—
LMArena WebDev—1461
SciCode—40.7%
ALE-Bench—670.15

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Qwen Max: —, Qwen3.6 Plus: —

BenchmarkQwen MaxQwen3.6 Plus
Vending-Bench 2—5,115

Reasoning Qwen3.6 Plus leads

Qwen Max: 25.1 (#151), Qwen3.6 Plus: 29.3 (#93)

BenchmarkQwen MaxQwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Hard Prompts12691449
NYT Connections (extended)—60.3%
CritPt—2.9%
Chess Puzzles—17%
Thematic Generalization—59.5%
Mystery Game Puzzles—12%
DTBench—81.9%
LMCA—33.1%
Epoch Capabilities Index—147.65

Math Qwen3.6 Plus leads

Qwen Max: 22.3 (#276), Qwen3.6 Plus: 51.8 (#54)

BenchmarkQwen MaxQwen3.6 Plus
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202516.1%93.3%
LMArena Math12751450
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)1%26.2%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—38.2%
MATH Level 567.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—8.3%

Knowledge Qwen3.6 Plus leads

Qwen Max: 30.3 (#228), Qwen3.6 Plus: 56.1 (#45)

BenchmarkQwen MaxQwen3.6 Plus
GPQA Diamond56.1%88.4%
LMArena Expert12481454
SimpleQA Verified—44.1%

Multilingual Qwen3.6 Plus leads

Qwen Max: 41.8 (#202), Qwen3.6 Plus: 53.3 (#70)

BenchmarkQwen MaxQwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Non-English12631424
LMArena Chinese12541477
LMArena French13301455
LMArena German12541452
LMArena Japanese12051389
LMArena Korean11421379
LMArena Russian12741434
LMArena Spanish12901432

Instruction Following Qwen3.6 Plus leads

Qwen Max: 66.5 (#208), Qwen3.6 Plus: 75.0 (#74)

BenchmarkQwen MaxQwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Instruction Following12621425

Long Context Qwen3.6 Plus leads

Qwen Max: 39.4 (#180), Qwen3.6 Plus: 45.2 (#49)

BenchmarkQwen MaxQwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Longer Query12881439
Fiction.LiveBench66.7%—
CL-bench—20.3%

Writing & Preference Qwen3.6 Plus leads

Qwen Max: 47.8 (#205), Qwen3.6 Plus: 62.2 (#82)

BenchmarkQwen MaxQwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text12821437
LMArena Creative Writing12481404
LMArena Multi-Turn12771438

Frequently asked questions

Is Qwen Max better than Qwen3.6 Plus?

Qwen3.6 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.5 to 34.7 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Qwen Max or Qwen3.6 Plus?

Qwen3.6 Plus is cheaper. It lists at $0.50 per million input tokens and $3 per million output tokens; Qwen Max lists at $1.60 and $6.40.

Is Qwen Max or Qwen3.6 Plus better for coding?

Qwen3.6 Plus scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.8 versus 30.7 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.6 Plus does, with 1M tokens against 33K.

How many benchmarks do Qwen Max and Qwen3.6 Plus share?

20 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen Max has 23 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Plus has 37.

Related comparisons

Go deeper