Model comparison

Qwen3.6 27B vs Solar Pro4

Qwen3.6 27B and Solar Pro4 score almost the same on the Noometry Index (42.2 vs 42.1), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

Qwen3.6 27B Alibaba (Qwen)

42.2

Rank #117 Confirmed

Solar Pro4 Upstage

42.1

Rank #121 Confirmed

Summary

  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.6 27B leads 52.4 to 39.8.
  • Solar Pro4 is cheaper at $0.30 / $1.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.60 / $3.60 for Qwen3.6 27B.
  • Solar Pro4 accepts more context: 524K tokens versus 262K.
  • Qwen3.6 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Qwen3.6 27B and Solar Pro4 specifications
Qwen3.6 27BSolar Pro4
ProviderAlibaba (Qwen)Upstage
Noometry Index42.242.1
Released2026-04-222026-08-06
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window262K524K
Max output66K131K
Input $ / M tokens$0.60$0.30
Output $ / M tokens$3.60$1.20
Results tracked1118

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

Category by category

Coding Solar Pro4 leads

Qwen3.6 27B: 39.1 (#163), Solar Pro4: 40.1 (#149)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3.6 27BSolar Pro4
LMArena WebDev—1371
SciCode37.3%—
LMArena Coding—1437

Reasoning Solar Pro4 leads

Qwen3.6 27B: 25.0 (#153), Solar Pro4: 28.5 (#104)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3.6 27BSolar Pro4
CritPt0.9%—
Chess Puzzles22%—
LMArena Hard Prompts—1399
Mystery Game Puzzles7%—
DTBench78.1%—
LMCA34.5%—
Epoch Capabilities Index146.5—

Math Qwen3.6 27B leads

Qwen3.6 27B: 48.5 (#62), Solar Pro4: 38.8 (#128)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3.6 27BSolar Pro4
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)35.1%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202591.1%—
LMArena Math—1416

Knowledge Qwen3.6 27B leads

Qwen3.6 27B: 52.4 (#63), Solar Pro4: 39.8 (#129)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3.6 27BSolar Pro4
GPQA Diamond85.9%—
LMArena Expert—1427

Multilingual Not comparable

Qwen3.6 27B: —, Solar Pro4: 48.7 (#139)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3.6 27BSolar Pro4
LMArena Non-English—1361
LMArena Chinese—1415
LMArena French—1397
LMArena German—1364
LMArena Japanese—1309
LMArena Korean—1382
LMArena Russian—1360
LMArena Spanish—1401

Instruction Following Not comparable

Qwen3.6 27B: —, Solar Pro4: 72.7 (#132)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3.6 27BSolar Pro4
LMArena Instruction Following—1377

Long Context Not comparable

Qwen3.6 27B: —, Solar Pro4: 42.1 (#130)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3.6 27BSolar Pro4
LMArena Longer Query—1381

Writing & Preference Solar Pro4 leads

Qwen3.6 27B: 50.3 (#181), Solar Pro4: 56.5 (#138)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3.6 27BSolar Pro4
LMArena Text—1386
LMArena Creative Writing—1316
EQ-Bench 41026—
LMArena Multi-Turn—1385

Frequently asked questions

Is Qwen3.6 27B better than Solar Pro4?

Qwen3.6 27B and Solar Pro4 score almost the same on the Noometry Index (42.2 vs 42.1), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3.6 27B or Solar Pro4?

Solar Pro4 is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $1.20 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 27B lists at $0.60 and $3.60.

Is Qwen3.6 27B or Solar Pro4 better for coding?

Solar Pro4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.1 versus 39.1 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Solar Pro4 does, with 524K tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks do Qwen3.6 27B and Solar Pro4 share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen3.6 27B has 11 scored results on Noometry and Solar Pro4 has 18.

Related comparisons

Go deeper