Navigate
AI BENCHY
Advertise here

inclusionAI: Ling-2.6-flash vs Qwen: Qwen3.6 35B A3B

Qwen3.6 35B A3B leads on average score with 5.3 vs 4.9. Ling-2.6-flash has the lower benchmark cost at $0.002 vs $0.061. Qwen3.6 35B A3B is faster at 5.52s vs 10.68s, with pass rates of 30.3% vs 31.8%.

Recommended modelQwen3.6 35B A3BIt has the best score here (5.3), while responding about 1.9x faster than Ling-2.6-flash.

Last updated at: 2026-07-21

Metric Ling-2.6-flash Ling-2.6-flash none Release: 2026-04-21 Qwen3.6 35B A3B Qwen3.6 35B A3B none Release: 2026-04-20
Score 4.9 5.3
Rank #184 #167
Reliability 10.0 10.0
Consistency 9.3 7.7
Tests Correct
Attempt pass rate 30.3% 31.8%
Flaky tests 2 6
Total Runs 66 66
Cost per result 0.024 1.496
Total Cost $0.002 $0.061
Input Price $0.010 / 1M $0.140 / 1M
Output Price $0.030 / 1M $1.000 / 1M
Total Input Tokens 114,375 93,979
Output Tokens 14,903 46,957
Reasoning Tokens 0 0
Response Time (avg) 10.68s 5.52s
Response Time (max) 36.03s 39.54s
Response Time (total) 213.51s 110.40s

Hamster playing table tennis

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

#184 Ling-2.6-flash

none
Ling-2.6-flash 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-flash
Cost
$0.000
Time
0.0s
Tokens
0 tok

#167 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-flash 5.3 10.0 33.3% 0 11.21s 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