#35 Qwen3.6 Plus
medium- Cost
- $0.024
- Time
- 219.0s
- Tokens
- 12,235 tok
Qwen
Release: 2026-04-20
Tested on: 2026-05-22 00:01
qwen/qwen3.6-plus::medium
~397B total (~17B active)MoEClosedEstimated Summary
Qwen3.6 Plus scores 7.8 on AI BENCHY and ranks #35. It has 10.0 reliability, a 68.3% pass rate, $0.082 total cost, and 26.78s average response time.
What makes Qwen3.6 Plus unique: Its total benchmark cost is unusually low for its score range.
Identity note
Qwen3.6 Plus Preview was the preview version of Qwen3.6 Plus.
Model facts
Researched on 2026-08-12
- Parameters
- ~397B total (~17B active)
- Architecture
- MoE
- Availability
- Closed
- License
- -
Best estimate from public evidence; the vendor did not disclose every value. Estimate from the nearest released Plus-class architecture.
7.8
Consistency
9.2
10.0
$0.082
Total Output Tokens
126,760
Total Input Tokens
0
Input Price
$0.325 / 1M
Output Price
$1.950 / 1M
Flaky tests
2
Flaky tests had mixed outcomes across runs (at least one pass and one fail).
Hamster playing table tennis
Prompt: Create a detailed SVG illustration of a hamster playing table tennis.
Run history
| Tested on | Score | Reliability | Tests Correct | Total Cost | Compare |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-08-14 01:53 Re-test | 7.8 | 10.0 | $0.418 ↑ | Compare | |
| 2026-07-16 21:57 New test added | 7.8 | 10.0 | $0.405 ↑ | Compare | |
| 2026-06-04 13:30 New test added | 7.9 | 10.0 | $0.294 ↑ | Compare | |
| 2026-05-22 00:01 Re-test | 7.8 | 10.0 | $0.082 | Current run | |
| 2026-04-11 01:44 First recorded run | 8.1 | N/A | $0.000 | Compare |
Run comparison
| Run | Benchmark coverage | Score | Consistency | Reliability | Tests Correct | Flaky tests | Total Output Tokens | Total Input Tokens | Total Cost | Response Time (avg) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-05-22 00:01 · Re-test | 60/60 attempts | 7.8 | 9.2 | 10.0 | 13/20 | 2 | 126,760 | 0 | $0.082 | 26.78s |
| 2026-07-16 21:57 · New test added | 66/66 attempts | 7.8 | 9.3 | 10.0 | 15/22 | 2 | 191,237 | 97,689 | $0.405 | 43.12s |
| Difference | — | -0.1 | -0.1 | 0.0 | -2 | 0 | -64477 | -97689 | -$0.323 | -16345ms |
Benchmark coverage differs: 60/60 attempts (Target: 3 repeats per test) versus 66/66 attempts (Target: 3 repeats per test). Totals and repeat-sensitive metrics are not directly comparable.
These two runs used different benchmark suites, so the deltas reflect both model changes and suite changes.
Charts
Choose the first model, then click a second model to open a side-by-side page.
Top Models by Score
Score vs Total Cost
Response Time (avg)
Score vs Response Time (avg)
Total Output Tokens
Score vs Total Output Tokens
Quick Compare
Qwen3.6 PlusmediumvsQwen3.7 PlusmediumQwen3.6 PlusmediumvsGemini 3.5 Flash LitemediumQwen3.6 PlusmediumvsQwen3.8 27BlowQwen3.6 PlusmediumvsGLM 5.2mediumQwen3.6 PlusmediumvsStep 3.7 FlashmediumQwen3.6 PlusmediumvsGPT-5.6 TerramediumQwen3.6 PlusmediumvsGPT-5.2 ChatnoneQwen3.6 PlusmediumvsClaude Sonnet 4.6mediumQwen3.6 PlusmediumvsKimi K3maxQwen3.6 PlusmediumvsQwen3.8 27Bmedium
Category Breakdown
| Category | Score | Consistency | Tests Correct |
|---|---|---|---|
| Anti-AI Tricks | 10.0 | 10.0 | |
| Coding | 4.1 | 6.7 | |
| Combined | 10.0 | 10.0 | |
| Data parsing and extraction | 10.0 | 10.0 | |
| Domain specific | 2.9 | 7.2 | |
| General Intelligence | 5.1 | 10.0 | |
| Instructions following | 10.0 | 10.0 | |
| Puzzle Solving | 10.0 | 10.0 | |
| Tool Calling | 10.0 | 10.0 | |
| Trivia | 3.0 | 10.0 |