Model comparison
Qwen3.6 35B-A3B vs Sonar
Qwen3.6 35B-A3B and Sonar score almost the same on the Noometry Index (37.6 vs 38.5), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)
PerplexitySummary
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.6 35B-A3B leads 28.0 to 21.1.
- Qwen3.6 35B-A3B is cheaper at $0.25 / $1.49 per million input/output tokens, against $1 / $1 for Sonar.
- Qwen3.6 35B-A3B accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 128K.
- Qwen3.6 35B-A3B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Qwen3.6 35B-A3B | Sonar | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Perplexity |
| Noometry Index | 37.6 | 38.5 |
| Released | 2026-04-01 | 2024-01-01 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 262K | 128K |
| Max output | 66K | 4K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.25 | $1 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $1.49 | $1 |
| Results tracked | 14 | 7 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3.6 35B-A3B leads
Qwen3.6 35B-A3B: 37.2 (#196), Sonar: 35.7 (#221)
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 35B-A3B | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 35.8% | — |
| WeirdML | 34.5% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 35.1% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Qwen3.6 35B-A3B: 22.1 (#134), Sonar: —
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 35B-A3B | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 23% | — |
Reasoning Qwen3.6 35B-A3B leads
Qwen3.6 35B-A3B: 28.0 (#109), Sonar: 21.1 (#227)
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 35B-A3B | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 41.6% | — |
| CritPt | 0.3% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 26% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 46.3% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 22% | — |
| DTBench | 73.9% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 37.9% |
| LMCA | 29.7% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 44.4% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 143.93 | — |
| LiveBench | — | 46.9% |
Math Qwen3.6 35B-A3B leads
Qwen3.6 35B-A3B: 38.9 (#121), Sonar: 33.7 (#200)
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 35B-A3B | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 20.4% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 86.7% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 41.6% |
Knowledge Not comparable
Qwen3.6 35B-A3B: 51.3 (#68), Sonar: —
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 35B-A3B | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 84.8% | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Qwen3.6 35B-A3B: —, Sonar: 71.4 (#150)
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 35B-A3B | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 76.2% |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Qwen3.6 35B-A3B: —, Sonar: 52.6 (#167)
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 35B-A3B | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Language | — | 44.1% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Qwen3.6 35B-A3B better than Sonar?
Qwen3.6 35B-A3B and Sonar score almost the same on the Noometry Index (37.6 vs 38.5), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Which is cheaper, Qwen3.6 35B-A3B or Sonar?
Qwen3.6 35B-A3B is cheaper. It lists at $0.25 per million input tokens and $1.49 per million output tokens; Sonar lists at $1 and $1.
Is Qwen3.6 35B-A3B or Sonar better for coding?
Qwen3.6 35B-A3B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.2 versus 35.7 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3.6 35B-A3B does, with 262K tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do Qwen3.6 35B-A3B and Sonar share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen3.6 35B-A3B has 14 scored results on Noometry and Sonar has 7.