Model comparison
Qwen3.6 27B vs Qwen3.6 Plus
Qwen3.6 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.5 to 42.2 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 10 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen3.6 27B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.6 Plus in 5 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen3.6 Plus leads 62.2 to 50.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Chess Puzzles: 22% for Qwen3.6 27B and 17% for Qwen3.6 Plus.
- Qwen3.6 Plus is cheaper at $0.50 / $3 per million input/output tokens, against $0.60 / $3.60 for Qwen3.6 27B.
- Qwen3.6 Plus accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 262K.
- Qwen3.6 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Qwen3.6 27B | Qwen3.6 Plus | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 42.2 | 47.5 |
| Released | 2026-04-22 | 2026-03-31 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 262K | 1M |
| Max output | 66K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.60 | $0.50 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $3.60 | $3 |
| Results tracked | 11 | 37 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3.6 Plus leads
Qwen3.6 27B: 39.1 (#163), Qwen3.6 Plus: 40.8 (#130)
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 27B | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 37.3% | 40.7% |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 57.9% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1461 |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1467 |
| ALE-Bench | — | 670.15 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Qwen3.6 27B: —, Qwen3.6 Plus: —
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 27B | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 5,115 |
Reasoning Qwen3.6 Plus leads
Qwen3.6 27B: 25.0 (#153), Qwen3.6 Plus: 29.3 (#93)
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 27B | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 0.9% | 2.9% |
| Chess Puzzles | 22% | 17% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 7% | 12% |
| DTBench | 78.1% | 81.9% |
| LMCA | 34.5% | 33.1% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 146.5 | 147.65 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 60.3% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 59.5% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1449 |
Math Qwen3.6 Plus leads
Qwen3.6 27B: 48.5 (#62), Qwen3.6 Plus: 51.8 (#54)
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 27B | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 35.1% | 38.2% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 91.1% | 93.3% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1450 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 26.2% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 8.3% |
Knowledge Qwen3.6 Plus leads
Qwen3.6 27B: 52.4 (#63), Qwen3.6 Plus: 56.1 (#45)
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 27B | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 85.9% | 88.4% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 44.1% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1454 |
Multilingual Not comparable
Qwen3.6 27B: —, Qwen3.6 Plus: 53.3 (#70)
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 27B | Qwen3.6 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
Qwen3.6 27B: —, Qwen3.6 Plus: 75.0 (#74)
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 27B | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1425 |
Long Context Not comparable
Qwen3.6 27B: —, Qwen3.6 Plus: 45.2 (#49)
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 27B | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| CL-bench | — | 20.3% |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1439 |
Writing & Preference Qwen3.6 Plus leads
Qwen3.6 27B: 50.3 (#181), Qwen3.6 Plus: 62.2 (#82)
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 27B | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1437 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1404 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1026 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1438 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Qwen3.6 27B better than Qwen3.6 Plus?
Qwen3.6 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.5 to 42.2 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Qwen3.6 27B or Qwen3.6 Plus?
Qwen3.6 Plus is cheaper. It lists at $0.50 per million input tokens and $3 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 27B lists at $0.60 and $3.60.
Is Qwen3.6 27B or Qwen3.6 Plus better for coding?
Qwen3.6 Plus scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.8 versus 39.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3.6 Plus does, with 1M tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks do Qwen3.6 27B and Qwen3.6 Plus share?
10 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen3.6 27B has 11 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Plus has 37.