Noometry

Model comparison

Qwen3.5-Flash vs Qwen3.6 Flash

Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.5 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Qwen3.5-Flash Alibaba (Qwen)

42.5

Rank #112 Confirmed

Qwen3.6 Flash Alibaba (Qwen)

38.8

Rank #182 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen3.5-Flash scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen3.6 Flash in 1 category; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.5-Flash leads 33.7 to 29.0.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 82.9% for Qwen3.5-Flash and 77.1% for Qwen3.6 Flash.
  • Qwen3.5-Flash is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $0.19 / $1.13 for Qwen3.6 Flash.

Side by side

Qwen3.5-FlashQwen3.6 Flash
ProviderAlibaba (Qwen)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index42.538.8
Released2026-02-232026-04-27
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M1M
Max output66K66K
Input $ / M tokens$0.10$0.19
Output $ / M tokens$0.40$1.13
Results tracked3213

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Qwen3.5-Flash: 34.2 (#242), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkQwen3.5-FlashQwen3.6 Flash
ALE-Bench221.8326.4
LMArena WebDev1244—
LMArena Coding1412—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Qwen3.5-Flash: —, Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkQwen3.5-FlashQwen3.6 Flash
Vending-Bench 2462.69—

Reasoning Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Qwen3.5-Flash: 33.7 (#72), Qwen3.6 Flash: 29.0 (#96)

BenchmarkQwen3.5-FlashQwen3.6 Flash
Chess Puzzles21%20%
Mystery Game Puzzles20%18%
DTBench82.9%77.1%
LMCA29.1%31%
Epoch Capabilities Index143.98143.26
SimpleBench—35.2%
LMArena Hard Prompts1403—

Math Qwen3.6 Flash leads

Qwen3.5-Flash: 37.4 (#158), Qwen3.6 Flash: 39.0 (#117)

BenchmarkQwen3.5-FlashQwen3.6 Flash
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)18.2%22.5%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202584.4%84.4%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)6.2%10.3%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)0%0%
LMArena Math1407—

Knowledge Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Qwen3.5-Flash: 43.2 (#93), Qwen3.6 Flash: 42.1 (#100)

BenchmarkQwen3.5-FlashQwen3.6 Flash
GPQA Diamond82.3%83.3%
SimpleQA Verified20.3%15.9%
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.5%—
LMArena Expert1407—

Multilingual Not comparable

Qwen3.5-Flash: 50.5 (#121), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkQwen3.5-FlashQwen3.6 Flash
LMArena Non-English1385—
LMArena Chinese1446—
LMArena French1412—
LMArena German1390—
LMArena Japanese1368—
LMArena Korean1344—
LMArena Russian1379—
LMArena Spanish1400—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Qwen3.5-Flash: 72.6 (#139), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkQwen3.5-FlashQwen3.6 Flash
LMArena Instruction Following1374—

Long Context Not comparable

Qwen3.5-Flash: 42.4 (#124), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkQwen3.5-FlashQwen3.6 Flash
LMArena Longer Query1392—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Qwen3.5-Flash: 57.9 (#122), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkQwen3.5-FlashQwen3.6 Flash
LMArena Text1397—
LMArena Creative Writing1343—
LMArena Multi-Turn1393—

Frequently asked questions

Is Qwen3.5-Flash better than Qwen3.6 Flash?

Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.5 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3.5-Flash or Qwen3.6 Flash?

Qwen3.5-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 Flash lists at $0.19 and $1.13.

Which has the bigger context window?

Both accept 1M tokens.

How many benchmarks do Qwen3.5-Flash and Qwen3.6 Flash share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen3.5-Flash has 32 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Flash has 13.

Related comparisons

Go deeper