# Mixtral 8x7B vs Qwen3.6 27B

> Qwen3.6 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.2 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index. Mixtral 8x7B costs 1.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.6 27B's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/mixtral-8x7b-vs-qwen3-6-27b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 3

## Summary

- They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. Mixtral 8x7B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.6 27B in 5 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.6 27B leads 52.4 to 11.0.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 30.6% for Mixtral 8x7B and 85.9% for Qwen3.6 27B.
- Mixtral 8x7B is cheaper at $0.70 / $0.70 per million input/output tokens, against $0.60 / $3.60 for Qwen3.6 27B.
- Qwen3.6 27B accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 32K.

## Snapshot

| | Mixtral 8x7B | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Mistral AI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 27.1 | 42.2 |
| Rank | 334 | 117 |
| Context | 32K | 262K |
| Input $/M | $0.70 | $0.60 |
| Output $/M | $0.70 | $3.60 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Mixtral 8x7B: 32.8 (#269)
- Qwen3.6 27B: 39.1 (#163)

| Benchmark | Mixtral 8x7B | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | — | 37.3% |
| LMArena Coding | 1126 | — |
| HumanEval+ | 39.6% | — |
| MBPP+ | 49.7% | — |

## Reasoning

- Mixtral 8x7B: 18.2 (#285)
- Qwen3.6 27B: 25.0 (#153)

| Benchmark | Mixtral 8x7B | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| DTBench | 49.6% | 78.1% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 118.47 | 146.5 |
| CritPt | — | 0.9% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 22% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1115 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 7% |
| LMCA | — | 34.5% |
| Adversarial NLI | 55.2% | — |
| ForecastBench | 56.3 | — |
| HellaSwag | 86.7% | — |
| PIQA | 83.6% | — |
| WinoGrande | 77.2% | — |

## Math

- Mixtral 8x7B: 18.8 (#289)
- Qwen3.6 27B: 48.5 (#62)

| Benchmark | Mixtral 8x7B | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 35.1% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 91.1% |
| Omni-MATH | 10.5% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1147 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 10% | — |
| GSM8K | 74.4% | — |

## Knowledge

- Mixtral 8x7B: 11.0 (#301)
- Qwen3.6 27B: 52.4 (#63)

| Benchmark | Mixtral 8x7B | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 30.6% | 85.9% |
| MMLU-Pro | 33.5% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 29.6% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1088 | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 87.3% | — |
| MMLU | 70.6% | — |
| OpenBookQA | 85.8% | — |
| TriviaQA | 82.2% | — |

## Multilingual

- Mixtral 8x7B: 29.6 (#266)
- Qwen3.6 27B: —

| Benchmark | Mixtral 8x7B | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1077 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1055 | — |
| LMArena French | 1166 | — |
| LMArena German | 1114 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 931 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 968 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1090 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1111 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Mixtral 8x7B: 51.0 (#297)
- Qwen3.6 27B: —

| Benchmark | Mixtral 8x7B | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | 57.5% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1109 | — |

## Long Context

- Mixtral 8x7B: 33.4 (#260)
- Qwen3.6 27B: —

| Benchmark | Mixtral 8x7B | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1103 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Mixtral 8x7B: 34.2 (#270)
- Qwen3.6 27B: 50.3 (#181)

| Benchmark | Mixtral 8x7B | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1132 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1109 | — |
| WildBench | 67.3% | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1026 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1115 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Mixtral 8x7B better than Qwen3.6 27B?

Qwen3.6 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.2 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index. Mixtral 8x7B costs 1.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.6 27B's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Mixtral 8x7B or Qwen3.6 27B?

Mixtral 8x7B is cheaper. It lists at $0.70 per million input tokens and $0.70 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 27B lists at $0.60 and $3.60.

### Is Mixtral 8x7B or Qwen3.6 27B better for coding?

Qwen3.6 27B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.1 versus 32.8 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.6 27B does, with 262K tokens against 32K.

### How many benchmarks do Mixtral 8x7B and Qwen3.6 27B share?

3 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mixtral 8x7B has 38 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 27B has 11.