Navigate
AI BENCHY
AD
Track all your projects in one dashboard. Get 📊stats, 🔥heatmaps and 👀recordings in one self-hosted dashboard.
uxwizz.com

Qwen3.6 27B vs GLM 5.1

The average score is effectively tied at 5.5 vs 5.5. Qwen3.6 27B has the lower benchmark cost at $0.067 vs $0.164. GLM 5.1 is faster at 6.70s vs 10.65s, with pass rates of 45.5% vs 40.9%.

Last updated at: 2026-07-25

Rank
#164
Total Output Tokens
16,155
Response Time (avg)
10.65s
Total Cost
$0.067
Rank
#163
Total Output Tokens
14,393
Response Time (avg)
6.70s
Total Cost
$0.164
Recommended model Qwen3.6 27B

It has the best score here (5.5), while costing about 2.5x less than GLM 5.1.

Detailed comparison

Metric Qwen3.6 27B Qwen3.6 27B none Release: 2026-04-20 GLM 5.1 GLM 5.1 none Release: 2026-04-07
Score 5.5 5.5
Rank #164 #163
Reliability 10.0 10.0
Consistency 7.6 8.2
Tests Correct
Attempt pass rate 45.5% 40.9%
Flaky tests 6 5
Total Runs 66 66
Cost per result 1.220 2.368
Total Cost $0.067 $0.164
Input Price $0.290 / 1M $0.966 / 1M
Output Price $2.400 / 1M $3.036 / 1M
Total Input Tokens 95,796 124,209
Output Tokens 16,155 14,393
Reasoning Tokens 0 0
Response Time (avg) 10.65s 6.70s
Response Time (max) 156.31s 61.20s
Response Time (total) 234.39s 147.38s

Hamster playing table tennis

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

#164 Qwen3.6 27B

none
Cost
$0.009
Time
83.0s
Tokens
4,549 tok

#163 GLM 5.1

none
Invalid SVG
Cost
$0.000
Time
300.0s
Tokens
0 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
Qwen3.6 27B 5.5 10.0 33.3% 0 4.16s 7,913 539 0
GLM 5.1 3.9 9.7 0.0% 0 4.96s 7,256 525 0

Quick Compare

Switch Comparison Pair