Model comparison
Qwen3.5 35B-A3B vs Ring-2.6-1T
Qwen3.5 35B-A3B has enough public results to be ranked (#118); Ring-2.6-1T does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)
Ant Group (inclusionAI)Summary
- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen3.5 35B-A3B scores higher in 0 categories and Ring-2.6-1T in 2 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where Ring-2.6-1T leads 40.1 to 33.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is SciCode: 29.3% for Qwen3.5 35B-A3B and 42.4% for Ring-2.6-1T.
Side by side
| Qwen3.5 35B-A3B | Ring-2.6-1T | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Ant Group (inclusionAI) |
| Noometry Index | 41.7 | 36.3 |
| Released | 2026-02-01 | 2026-05-14 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 262K | — |
| Max output | 66K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.25 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2 | — |
| Results tracked | 28 | 3 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Ring-2.6-1T leads
Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: 33.5 (#244), Ring-2.6-1T: 40.1
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5 35B-A3B | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 29.3% | 42.4% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1254 | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1410 | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 432.57 |
Reasoning Ring-2.6-1T leads
Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: 23.9 (#158), Ring-2.6-1T: 25.3
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5 35B-A3B | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 0.6% | 3.7% |
| Chess Puzzles | 10% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1400 | — |
| DTBench | 80% | — |
| LMCA | 29.5% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 142.52 | — |
Math Not comparable
Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: 38.4 (#86), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5 35B-A3B | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 56% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 70% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1404 | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: 47.7 (#73), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5 35B-A3B | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 83.5% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 10.5% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1408 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: 50.2 (#122), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5 35B-A3B | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1379 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1458 | — |
| LMArena French | 1412 | — |
| LMArena German | 1367 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1326 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1354 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1377 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1390 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: 73.0 (#123), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5 35B-A3B | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1379 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: 42.4 (#122), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5 35B-A3B | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1390 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: 58.1 (#118), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5 35B-A3B | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1395 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1347 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1391 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Qwen3.5 35B-A3B better than Ring-2.6-1T?
Qwen3.5 35B-A3B has enough public results to be ranked (#118); Ring-2.6-1T does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Is Qwen3.5 35B-A3B or Ring-2.6-1T better for coding?
Ring-2.6-1T scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.1 versus 33.5 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Qwen3.5 35B-A3B and Ring-2.6-1T share?
2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen3.5 35B-A3B has 28 scored results on Noometry and Ring-2.6-1T has 3.