Model comparison
DeepSeek V4 Pro Base vs Qwen3.6 Plus
Head-to-head evidence from 5 shared benchmark results across 2 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V4 Pro Base unranked (Not scored); Qwen3.6 Plus #30 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. DeepSeek V4 Pro Base and Qwen3.6 Plus share 5 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 19 results are unique to DeepSeek V4 Pro Base; 55 to Qwen3.6 Plus.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 5
- DeepSeek V4 Pro Base only
- 19
- Qwen3.6 Plus only
- 55
- Comparable categories
- 2 / 8
Treat this as a split decision. DeepSeek V4 Pro Base makes more sense if knowledge is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model; Qwen3.6 Plus is the better fit if reasoning is the priority or you want the stronger reasoning-first profile.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 5 shared benchmark results across 2 evidence categories; 2 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
DeepSeek V4 Pro Base and Qwen3.6 Plus finish on the same BenchAlign overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The BenchAlign headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.
Qwen3.6 Plus is the reasoning model in the pair, while DeepSeek V4 Pro Base 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 Pro Base | Δ | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reasoning | DeepSeek V4 Pro Base51.5 | Margin→ 10.5 | Qwen3.6 Plus62.0 |
| Knowledge | DeepSeek V4 Pro Base66.4 | Margin← 9.3 | Qwen3.6 Plus57.1 |
| Agentic | DeepSeek V4 Pro BaseNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.6 Plus61.6 |
| Coding | DeepSeek V4 Pro BaseNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.6 Plus70.3 |
| Math | DeepSeek V4 Pro BaseNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.6 Plus60.5 |
| Multilingual | DeepSeek V4 Pro BaseNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.6 Plus84.7 |
| Multimodal | DeepSeek V4 Pro BaseNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.6 Plus79.8 |
| Inst. Following | DeepSeek V4 Pro BaseNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.6 Plus82.3 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
SuperGPQA
KnowledgeA 53.9%B 71.6%Winner: Qwen3.6 PlusΔ 17.7SuperGPQA: DeepSeek V4 Pro Base scored 53.9%; Qwen3.6 Plus scored 71.6%. Qwen3.6 Plus wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
MMLU-Pro
KnowledgeA 73.5%B 88.5%Winner: Qwen3.6 PlusΔ 15MMLU-Pro: DeepSeek V4 Pro Base scored 73.5%; Qwen3.6 Plus scored 88.5%. Qwen3.6 Plus wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
LongBench v2
ReasoningA 51.5%B 62%Winner: Qwen3.6 PlusΔ 10.5LongBench v2: DeepSeek V4 Pro Base scored 51.5%; Qwen3.6 Plus scored 62%. 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 Pro Base | Qwen3.6 Plus | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | DeepSeek V4 Pro BaseNot available | Qwen3.6 PlusNot available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | DeepSeek V4 Pro BaseNot available | Qwen3.6 PlusNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | DeepSeek V4 Pro BaseNot available | Qwen3.6 PlusNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | DeepSeek V4 Pro Base1M | Qwen3.6 Plus1M | Listed context windows are equal. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic16 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro Base | Qwen3.6 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 61.6% | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | — | 58.8% | Not comparable |
| QwenClawBenchSource | — | 57.2% | Not comparable |
| τ³-bench resultsSource | — | 70.7% | Not comparable |
| VITA-BenchSource | — | 44.3% | Not comparable |
| DeepPlanningSource | — | 41.5% | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | — | 39.8% | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | — | 48.2% | 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 |
| Gert LabsSource | — | 50.60% | Not comparable |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | — | 18.0% | Not comparable |
Coding9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro Base | Qwen3.6 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBenchSource | 59.2% | — | Not comparable |
| HumanEvalSource | 76.8% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | — | 78.8% | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | — | 56.6% | Not comparable |
| SWE MultilingualSource | — | 73.8% | 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 |
ReasoningQwen3.6 Plus wins9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro Base | Qwen3.6 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| BBHSource | 87.5% | — | Not comparable |
| DROPSource | 88.7% | — | Not comparable |
| HellaSwagSource | 88.0% | — | Not comparable |
| WinoGrandeSource | 81.5% | — | Not comparable |
| CLUEWSCSource | 85.2% | — | Not comparable |
| LongBench v2Source | 51.5% | 62% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| AI-NeedleSource | — | 68.3% | Not comparable |
| AA-LCRSource | — | 69.7% | Not comparable |
| CritPtSource | — | 2.9% | Not comparable |
KnowledgeDeepSeek V4 Pro Base wins20 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro Base | Qwen3.6 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AGIEvalSource | 83.1% | — | Not comparable |
| MMLUSource | 90.1% | — | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ReduxSource | 90.8% | 94.5% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| MMLU-ProSource | 73.5% | 88.5% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| MMMLUSource | 90.3% | — | Not comparable |
| C-EvalSource | 93.1% | 93.3% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| CMMLUSource | 90.8% | — | Not comparable |
| MultiLoKoSource | 51.1% | — | Not comparable |
| SimpleQASource | 55.2% | — | Not comparable |
| SuperGPQASource | 53.9% | 71.6% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| FACTS ParametricSource | 62.6% | — | Not comparable |
| TriviaQASource | 85.6% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | — | 90.4% | Not comparable |
| HLESource | — | 28.8% | 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 |
Math10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro Base | Qwen3.6 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GSM8KSource | 92.6% | — | Not comparable |
| MATHSource | 64.5% | — | Not comparable |
| CMathSource | 90.9% | — | Not comparable |
| AIME26Source | — | 95.3% | Not comparable |
| HMMT Feb 2025Source | — | 96.7% | Not comparable |
| HMMT Nov 2025Source | — | 94.6% | Not comparable |
| HMMT Feb 2026Source | — | 87.8% | 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 |
Multilingual3 benchmarks
Multimodal9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro Base | Qwen3.6 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | — | 1249 | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Which is better, DeepSeek V4 Pro Base or Qwen3.6 Plus?
DeepSeek V4 Pro Base and Qwen3.6 Plus are tied on the BenchAlign overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, DeepSeek V4 Pro Base or Qwen3.6 Plus?
DeepSeek V4 Pro Base has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 66.4 versus 57.1. Inside this category, SuperGPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for reasoning, DeepSeek V4 Pro Base or Qwen3.6 Plus?
Qwen3.6 Plus has the edge for reasoning in this comparison, averaging 62 versus 51.5. Inside this category, LongBench v2 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.