Model comparison

Qwen3-1.7B vs Qwen3.6 Plus

Qwen3.6 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.5 to 26.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.

Qwen3-1.7B Alibaba (Qwen)

26.6

Rank #336 Reported

Qwen3.6 Plus Alibaba (Qwen)

47.5

Rank #62 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen3-1.7B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.6 Plus in 3 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.6 Plus leads 56.1 to 19.6.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 8.1% for Qwen3-1.7B and 93.3% for Qwen3.6 Plus.
  • Qwen3-1.7B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Qwen3-1.7B and Qwen3.6 Plus specifications
Qwen3-1.7BQwen3.6 Plus
ProviderAlibaba (Qwen)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index26.647.5
Released2025-04-292026-03-31
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window—1M
Max output—66K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.50
Output $ / M tokens—$3
Results tracked437

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Qwen3-1.7B: —, Qwen3.6 Plus: 40.8 (#130)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3-1.7BQwen3.6 Plus
SWE-bench Verified—57.9%
LMArena WebDev—1461
SciCode—40.7%
LMArena Coding—1467
ALE-Bench—670.15

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Qwen3-1.7B: 24.7 (#115), Qwen3.6 Plus: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3-1.7BQwen3.6 Plus
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard28.4%—
Vending-Bench 2—5,115

Reasoning Qwen3.6 Plus leads

Qwen3-1.7B: 19.2 (#267), Qwen3.6 Plus: 29.3 (#93)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3-1.7BQwen3.6 Plus
Chess Puzzles0%17%
NYT Connections (extended)—60.3%
CritPt—2.9%
Thematic Generalization—59.5%
LMArena Hard Prompts—1449
Mystery Game Puzzles—12%
DTBench—81.9%
LMCA—33.1%
Epoch Capabilities Index—147.65

Math Qwen3.6 Plus leads

Qwen3-1.7B: 16.3 (#294), Qwen3.6 Plus: 51.8 (#54)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3-1.7BQwen3.6 Plus
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20258.1%93.3%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—38.2%
LMArena Math—1450
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—26.2%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—8.3%

Knowledge Qwen3.6 Plus leads

Qwen3-1.7B: 19.6 (#278), Qwen3.6 Plus: 56.1 (#45)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3-1.7BQwen3.6 Plus
GPQA Diamond38%88.4%
SimpleQA Verified—44.1%
LMArena Expert—1454

Multilingual Not comparable

Qwen3-1.7B: —, Qwen3.6 Plus: 53.3 (#70)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3-1.7BQwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Non-English—1424
LMArena Chinese—1477
LMArena French—1455
LMArena German—1452
LMArena Japanese—1389
LMArena Korean—1379
LMArena Russian—1434
LMArena Spanish—1432

Instruction Following Not comparable

Qwen3-1.7B: —, Qwen3.6 Plus: 75.0 (#74)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3-1.7BQwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Instruction Following—1425

Long Context Not comparable

Qwen3-1.7B: —, Qwen3.6 Plus: 45.2 (#49)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3-1.7BQwen3.6 Plus
CL-bench—20.3%
LMArena Longer Query—1439

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Qwen3-1.7B: —, Qwen3.6 Plus: 62.2 (#82)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3-1.7BQwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text—1437
LMArena Creative Writing—1404
LMArena Multi-Turn—1438

Frequently asked questions

Is Qwen3-1.7B better than Qwen3.6 Plus?

Qwen3.6 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.5 to 26.6 on the Noometry Index.

How many benchmarks do Qwen3-1.7B and Qwen3.6 Plus share?

3 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen3-1.7B has 4 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Plus has 37.

Related comparisons

Go deeper