Model comparison
DeepSeek V4 Flash vs Qwen3.6 Plus
Head-to-head evidence from 13 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V4 Flash #61 (Estimated); Qwen3.6 Plus #30 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. DeepSeek V4 Flash and Qwen3.6 Plus share 13 comparable benchmark results. 4 of 8 categories are comparable. 9 results are unique to DeepSeek V4 Flash; 47 to Qwen3.6 Plus.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 13
- DeepSeek V4 Flash only
- 9
- Qwen3.6 Plus only
- 47
- Comparable categories
- 4 / 8
Pick Qwen3.6 Plus if you want the stronger benchmark profile. DeepSeek V4 Flash only becomes the better choice if you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 13 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 4 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Qwen3.6 Plus is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 65.2 to 58.88. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Qwen3.6 Plus's sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 60.5 against 40.8. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is HMMT Feb 2026, 40.8% to 87.8%.
Qwen3.6 Plus is the reasoning model in the pair, while DeepSeek V4 Flash is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | DeepSeek V4 Flash | Δ | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | DeepSeek V4 Flash40.8 | Margin→ 19.7 | Qwen3.6 Plus60.5 |
| Knowledge | DeepSeek V4 Flash38.8 | Margin→ 18.3 | Qwen3.6 Plus57.1 |
| Agentic | DeepSeek V4 Flash49.1 | Margin→ 12.5 | Qwen3.6 Plus61.6 |
| Coding | DeepSeek V4 Flash64.2 | Margin→ 6.1 | Qwen3.6 Plus70.3 |
| Reasoning | DeepSeek V4 FlashNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.6 Plus62.0 |
| Multilingual | DeepSeek V4 FlashNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.6 Plus84.7 |
| Multimodal | DeepSeek V4 FlashNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.6 Plus79.8 |
| Inst. Following | DeepSeek V4 FlashNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.6 Plus82.3 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
HMMT Feb 2026
MathA 40.8%B 87.8%Winner: Qwen3.6 PlusΔ 47HMMT Feb 2026: DeepSeek V4 Flash scored 40.8%; Qwen3.6 Plus scored 87.8%. Qwen3.6 Plus wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
HLE
KnowledgeA 8.1%B 28.8%Winner: Qwen3.6 PlusΔ 20.7HLE: DeepSeek V4 Flash scored 8.1%; Qwen3.6 Plus scored 28.8%. Qwen3.6 Plus wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
GPQA
KnowledgeA 71.2%B 90.4%Winner: Qwen3.6 PlusΔ 19.2GPQA: DeepSeek V4 Flash scored 71.2%; Qwen3.6 Plus scored 90.4%. Qwen3.6 Plus wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 49.1%B 61.6%Winner: Qwen3.6 PlusΔ 12.5Terminal-Bench 2.0: DeepSeek V4 Flash scored 49.1%; Qwen3.6 Plus scored 61.6%. Qwen3.6 Plus wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Pro
CodingA 49.1%B 56.6%Winner: Qwen3.6 PlusΔ 7.5SWE-bench Pro: DeepSeek V4 Flash scored 49.1%; Qwen3.6 Plus scored 56.6%. Qwen3.6 Plus wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | DeepSeek V4 Flash | Qwen3.6 Plus | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | DeepSeek V4 Flash$0.14 input / $0.28 output | Qwen3.6 PlusNot available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | DeepSeek V4 FlashNot available | Qwen3.6 PlusNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | DeepSeek V4 FlashNot available | Qwen3.6 PlusNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | DeepSeek V4 Flash1M | Qwen3.6 Plus1M | Listed context windows are equal. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticQwen3.6 Plus wins16 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash | Qwen3.6 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 49.1% | 61.6% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| MCP AtlasSource | 64% | 48.2% | DeepSeek V4 Flash leads |
| ToolathlonSource | 40.7% | 39.8% | DeepSeek V4 Flash leads |
| Claw-EvalSource | 57.8% | 58.8% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| Gert LabsSource | 54.35% | 50.60% | DeepSeek V4 Flash leads |
| QwenClawBenchSource | — | 57.2% | Not comparable |
| τ³-bench resultsSource | — | 70.7% | Not comparable |
| VITA-BenchSource | — | 44.3% | Not comparable |
| DeepPlanningSource | — | 41.5% | Not comparable |
| MCP-TasksSource | — | 74.1% | Not comparable |
| WideResearchSource | — | 74.3% | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 27.6% | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 97.7% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 31.8% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 1135 | Not comparable |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | — | 18.0% | Not comparable |
CodingQwen3.6 Plus wins8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash | Qwen3.6 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 73.7% | 78.8% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 49.1% | 56.6% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| SWE MultilingualSource | 69.7% | 73.8% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 49.1% | — | Not comparable |
| LiveCodeBench v6Source | — | 87.1% | Not comparable |
| Vibe Code BenchSource | — | 25.56% | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | — | 54.5% | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | — | 40.7% | Not comparable |
Reasoning6 benchmarks
KnowledgeQwen3.6 Plus wins15 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash | Qwen3.6 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProSource | 83% | 88.5% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| SimpleQASource | 23.1% | — | Not comparable |
| Chinese-SimpleQASource | 71.5% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | 71.2% | 90.4% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| GPQA-DSource | 71.2% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 8.1% | 28.8% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| SuperGPQASource | — | 71.6% | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ReduxSource | — | 94.5% | Not comparable |
| C-EvalSource | — | 93.3% | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | — | 39.6% | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | — | 88.2% | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | — | 25.7% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | 2.7% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 26.2% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 32.0% | Not comparable |
MathQwen3.6 Plus wins10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash | Qwen3.6 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| HMMT Feb 2026Source | 40.8% | 87.8% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| IMOAnswerBenchSource | 41.9% | — | Not comparable |
| ApexSource | 1.0% | — | Not comparable |
| Apex ShortlistSource | 9.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AIME26Source | — | 95.3% | Not comparable |
| HMMT Feb 2025Source | — | 96.7% | Not comparable |
| HMMT Nov 2025Source | — | 94.6% | Not comparable |
| MMAnswerBenchSource | — | 83.8% | Not comparable |
| FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source | — | 26.207% | Not comparable |
| FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source | — | 8.333% | Not comparable |
Multilingual2 benchmarks
Multimodal9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash | Qwen3.6 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1238 | 1249 | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| MMMUSource | — | 86.0% | Not comparable |
| MMMU-ProSource | — | 78.8% | Not comparable |
| MathVisionSource | — | 88.0% | Not comparable |
| VideoMMMUSource | — | 84.0% | Not comparable |
| ScreenSpot ProSource | — | 68.2% | Not comparable |
| CharXivSource | — | 81.5% | Not comparable |
| V*Source | — | 96.9% | Not comparable |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | — | 78.0% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (5)
Which is better, DeepSeek V4 Flash or Qwen3.6 Plus?
Qwen3.6 Plus is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 65.2 to 58.88. The biggest single separator in this matchup is HMMT Feb 2026, where the scores are 40.8% and 87.8%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, DeepSeek V4 Flash or Qwen3.6 Plus?
Qwen3.6 Plus has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 57.1 versus 38.8. Inside this category, HLE is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, DeepSeek V4 Flash or Qwen3.6 Plus?
Qwen3.6 Plus has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 70.3 versus 64.2. Inside this category, SWE-bench Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for math, DeepSeek V4 Flash or Qwen3.6 Plus?
Qwen3.6 Plus has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 60.5 versus 40.8. Inside this category, HMMT Feb 2026 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, DeepSeek V4 Flash or Qwen3.6 Plus?
Qwen3.6 Plus has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 61.6 versus 49.1. Inside this category, MCP Atlas is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.