Navigate
AI BENCHY
Advertise here

Ling-2.6-1T vs Qwen3.6 35B A3B

The average score is effectively tied at 5.3 vs 5.3. Ling-2.6-1T has the lower benchmark cost at $0.016 vs $0.061. Qwen3.6 35B A3B is faster at 5.52s vs 8.58s, with pass rates of 18.2% vs 31.8%.

Last updated at: 2026-07-25

Rank
#176
Total Output Tokens
11,555
Response Time (avg)
8.58s
Total Cost
$0.016
Rank
#175
Total Output Tokens
46,957
Response Time (avg)
5.52s
Total Cost
$0.061
Recommended model Qwen3.6 35B A3B

It has the best score here (5.3), while responding about 1.6x faster than Ling-2.6-1T.

Detailed comparison

Metric Ling-2.6-1T Ling-2.6-1T none Release: 2026-04-23 Qwen3.6 35B A3B Qwen3.6 35B A3B none Release: 2026-04-20
Score 5.3 5.3
Rank #176 #175
Reliability 10.0 10.0
Consistency 10.0 7.7
Tests Correct
Attempt pass rate 18.2% 31.8%
Flaky tests 0 6
Total Runs 66 66
Cost per result 0.277 1.496
Total Cost $0.016 $0.061
Input Price $0.075 / 1M $0.140 / 1M
Output Price $0.625 / 1M $1.000 / 1M
Total Input Tokens 106,414 93,979
Output Tokens 11,555 46,957
Reasoning Tokens 0 0
Response Time (avg) 8.58s 5.52s
Response Time (max) 25.72s 39.54s
Response Time (total) 163.06s 110.40s

Hamster playing table tennis

Prompt: Create a detailed SVG illustration of a hamster playing table tennis.

#176 Ling-2.6-1T

none
Ling-2.6-1T is no longer available as a free model. It has transitioned to a paid model. Continue using it here: https://openrouter.ai/inclusionai/ling-2.6-1t
Cost
$0.000
Time
0.1s
Tokens
0 tok

#175 Qwen3.6 35B A3B

none
Cost
$0.008
Time
30.1s
Tokens
6,317 tok

Top Models by Score

Score vs Total Cost

Response Time (avg)

Score vs Response Time (avg)

Total Output Tokens

Score vs Total Output Tokens

Category Breakdown

Coding Score Consistency Attempt pass rate Flaky tests Tests Correct Response Time (avg) Input Tokens Output Tokens Reasoning Tokens
Ling-2.6-1T 3.8 10.0 0.0% 0 10.57s 813 381 0
Qwen3.6 35B A3B 5.5 10.0 33.3% 0 8.77s 7,911 11,161 0

Quick Compare

Switch Comparison Pair