Model comparison
Qwen3.6 27B vs Step 3.7 Flash
Qwen3.6 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.2 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index. Step 3.7 Flash costs 3.2× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.6 27B's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)
StepFunSummary
- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen3.6 27B scores higher in 2 categories and Step 3.7 Flash in 1 category; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.6 27B leads 48.5 to 42.9.
- Step 3.7 Flash is cheaper at $0.18 / $1.11 per million input/output tokens, against $0.60 / $3.60 for Qwen3.6 27B.
- Qwen3.6 27B accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 256K.
Side by side
| Qwen3.6 27B | Step 3.7 Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | StepFun |
| Noometry Index | 42.2 | 37.3 |
| Released | 2026-04-22 | 2026-05-29 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 262K | 256K |
| Max output | 66K | 256K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.60 | $0.18 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $3.60 | $1.11 |
| Results tracked | 11 | 5 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
Qwen3.6 27B: 39.1 (#163), Step 3.7 Flash: 40.0 (#150)
Reasoning Qwen3.6 27B leads
Qwen3.6 27B: 25.0 (#153), Step 3.7 Flash: 21.6 (#219)
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 27B | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 0.9% | 2.3% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 39.7% |
| Chess Puzzles | 22% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 7% | — |
| DTBench | 78.1% | — |
| LMCA | 34.5% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 146.5 | — |
Math Qwen3.6 27B leads
Qwen3.6 27B: 48.5 (#62), Step 3.7 Flash: 42.9 (#82)
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 27B | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 35.1% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 68.5% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 91.1% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Qwen3.6 27B: 52.4 (#63), Step 3.7 Flash: —
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 27B | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 85.9% | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Qwen3.6 27B: 50.3 (#181), Step 3.7 Flash: —
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 27B | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1026 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Qwen3.6 27B better than Step 3.7 Flash?
Qwen3.6 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.2 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index. Step 3.7 Flash costs 3.2× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.6 27B's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Qwen3.6 27B or Step 3.7 Flash?
Step 3.7 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.18 per million input tokens and $1.11 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 27B lists at $0.60 and $3.60.
Is Qwen3.6 27B or Step 3.7 Flash better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (39.1 vs 40.0); test both on your own repository before choosing.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3.6 27B does, with 262K tokens against 256K.
How many benchmarks do Qwen3.6 27B and Step 3.7 Flash share?
2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen3.6 27B has 11 scored results on Noometry and Step 3.7 Flash has 5.