Navigate
AI BENCHY
Advertise here

Meituan: LongCat 2.0 vs Qwen: Qwen3.6 27B

LongCat 2.0 (low) leads on average score with 6.7 vs 6.5. LongCat 2.0 (low) has the lower benchmark cost at $0.391 vs $0.779. LongCat 2.0 (low) is faster at 100.31s vs 106.32s, with pass rates of 53.0% vs 59.1%.

Recommended modelLongCat 2.0 (low)It has the best score here (6.7), while costing about 2.0x less than Qwen3.6 27B (medium).

Last updated at: 2026-07-21

Metric LongCat 2.0 LongCat 2.0 low Release: 2026-07-20 Qwen3.6 27B Qwen3.6 27B medium Release: 2026-04-20
Score 6.7 6.5
Rank #96 #105
Reliability 9.6 10.0
Consistency 8.9 8.0
Tests Correct
Attempt pass rate 53.0% 59.1%
Flaky tests 3 6
Total Runs 66 66
Cost per result 3.910 7.319
Total Cost $0.391 $0.779
Input Price $0.300 / 1M $0.450 / 1M
Output Price $1.200 / 1M $2.700 / 1M
Total Input Tokens 90,909 106,167
Output Tokens 5,679 32,889
Reasoning Tokens 297,369 241,303
Response Time (avg) 100.31s 106.32s
Response Time (max) 560.39s 1085.11s
Response Time (total) 2206.82s 2339.12s

Hamster playing table tennis

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

#96 LongCat 2.0

low
Cost
$0.024
Time
428.0s
Tokens
19,557 tok

#105 Qwen3.6 27B

medium
Cost
$0.009
Time
39.6s
Tokens
3,090 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
LongCat 2.0 6.6 4.6 77.8% 2 479.30s 6,544 461 206,627
Qwen3.6 27B 7.7 10.0 66.7% 0 142.99s 5,051 7,968 43,367

Quick Compare

Switch Comparison Pair