Model comparison

Qwen2.5-Max vs Qwen3.6 Flash

Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.1 to 38.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

Qwen2.5-Max Alibaba (Qwen)

40.1

Rank #142 Confirmed

Qwen3.6 Flash Alibaba (Qwen)

38.4

Rank #176 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Qwen2.5-Max scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.6 Flash in 3 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.6 Flash leads 42.2 to 34.8.

Side by side

Qwen2.5-Max and Qwen3.6 Flash specifications
Qwen2.5-MaxQwen3.6 Flash
ProviderAlibaba (Qwen)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index40.138.4
Released2025-01-252026-04-27
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window—1M
Max output—66K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.19
Output $ / M tokens—$1.13
Results tracked2713

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Qwen2.5-Max: 41.2 (#118), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5-MaxQwen3.6 Flash
LiveBench Coding64.4%—
LMArena Coding1359—
ALE-Bench—326.4

Reasoning Qwen3.6 Flash leads

Qwen2.5-Max: 24.6 (#144), Qwen3.6 Flash: 28.4 (#90)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5-MaxQwen3.6 Flash
Epoch Capabilities Index132.54143.26
SimpleBench—35.2%
Chess Puzzles—20%
LiveBench Reasoning51.4%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1360—
Mystery Game Puzzles—18%
DTBench—77.1%
LiveBench Data Analysis67.9%—
LMCA—31%
LiveBench62.3%—

Math Qwen3.6 Flash leads

Qwen2.5-Max: 34.3 (#162), Qwen3.6 Flash: 38.0 (#88)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5-MaxQwen3.6 Flash
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—22.5%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—84.4%
LiveBench Math58.4%—
LMArena Math1369—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—10.3%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—0%

Knowledge Qwen3.6 Flash leads

Qwen2.5-Max: 34.8 (#181), Qwen3.6 Flash: 42.2 (#90)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5-MaxQwen3.6 Flash
GPQA Diamond—83.3%
SimpleQA Verified—15.9%
Confabulations21.8%—
LMArena Expert1337—

Multilingual Not comparable

Qwen2.5-Max: 48.3 (#140), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5-MaxQwen3.6 Flash
LMArena Non-English1352—
LMArena Chinese1382—
LMArena French1396—
LMArena German1350—
LMArena Japanese1299—
LMArena Korean1304—
LMArena Russian1353—
LMArena Spanish1377—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Qwen2.5-Max: 71.5 (#147), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5-MaxQwen3.6 Flash
LiveBench Instruction Following75.3%—
LMArena Instruction Following1335—

Long Context Not comparable

Qwen2.5-Max: 41.3 (#137), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5-MaxQwen3.6 Flash
LMArena Longer Query1358—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Qwen2.5-Max: 55.6 (#141), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5-MaxQwen3.6 Flash
LMArena Text1367—
LMArena Creative Writing1339—
Short-Story Creative Writing72.9%—
LMArena Multi-Turn1364—
LiveBench Language56.3%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Qwen2.5-Max better than Qwen3.6 Flash?

Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.1 to 38.4 on the Noometry Index.

How many benchmarks do Qwen2.5-Max and Qwen3.6 Flash share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. Qwen2.5-Max has 27 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Flash has 13.

Related comparisons

Go deeper