Model comparison
MAI-Thinking-1 vs Qwen3.6 Plus
Head-to-head evidence from 8 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: MAI-Thinking-1 unranked (Not scored); Qwen3.6 Plus #30 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. MAI-Thinking-1 and Qwen3.6 Plus share 8 comparable benchmark results. 5 of 8 categories are comparable. 5 results are unique to MAI-Thinking-1; 52 to Qwen3.6 Plus.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 8
- MAI-Thinking-1 only
- 5
- Qwen3.6 Plus only
- 52
- Comparable categories
- 5 / 8
Treat this as a split decision. MAI-Thinking-1 makes more sense if mathematics is the priority; Qwen3.6 Plus is the better fit if agentic is the priority or you need the larger 1M context window.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 8 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 5 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
MAI-Thinking-1 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 gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 256K for MAI-Thinking-1.
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 | MAI-Thinking-1 | Δ | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | MAI-Thinking-189.7 | Margin← 29.2 | Qwen3.6 Plus60.5 |
| Agentic | MAI-Thinking-146.0 | Margin→ 15.6 | Qwen3.6 Plus61.6 |
| Knowledge | MAI-Thinking-172.5 | Margin← 15.4 | Qwen3.6 Plus57.1 |
| Coding | MAI-Thinking-165.5 | Margin→ 4.8 | Qwen3.6 Plus70.3 |
| Inst. Following | MAI-Thinking-185.0 | Margin← 2.7 | Qwen3.6 Plus82.3 |
| Reasoning | MAI-Thinking-1Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.6 Plus62.0 |
| Multilingual | MAI-Thinking-1Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.6 Plus84.7 |
| Multimodal | MAI-Thinking-1Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.6 Plus79.8 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 46%B 61.6%Winner: Qwen3.6 PlusΔ 15.6Terminal-Bench 2.0: MAI-Thinking-1 scored 46%; Qwen3.6 Plus scored 61.6%. Qwen3.6 Plus wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
IFBench
Inst. FollowingA 85%B 75.8%Winner: MAI-Thinking-1Δ 9.2IFBench: MAI-Thinking-1 scored 85%; Qwen3.6 Plus scored 75.8%. MAI-Thinking-1 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
GPQA
KnowledgeA 84.2%B 90.4%Winner: Qwen3.6 PlusΔ 6.2GPQA: MAI-Thinking-1 scored 84.2%; Qwen3.6 Plus scored 90.4%. Qwen3.6 Plus wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 73.5%B 78.8%Winner: Qwen3.6 PlusΔ 5.3SWE-bench Verified: MAI-Thinking-1 scored 73.5%; Qwen3.6 Plus scored 78.8%. Qwen3.6 Plus wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Pro
CodingA 52.8%B 56.6%Winner: Qwen3.6 PlusΔ 3.8SWE-bench Pro: MAI-Thinking-1 scored 52.8%; 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 | MAI-Thinking-1 | Qwen3.6 Plus | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | MAI-Thinking-1Not available | Qwen3.6 PlusNot available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | MAI-Thinking-1Not available | Qwen3.6 PlusNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | MAI-Thinking-1Not available | Qwen3.6 PlusNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | MAI-Thinking-1256K | Qwen3.6 Plus1M | Qwen3.6 Plus lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticQwen3.6 Plus wins16 benchmarks
| Benchmark | MAI-Thinking-1 | Qwen3.6 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 46% | 61.6% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| 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 |
CodingQwen3.6 Plus wins8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | MAI-Thinking-1 | Qwen3.6 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 73.5% | 78.8% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 52.8% | 56.6% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 46.0% | — | 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 |
Reasoning5 benchmarks
KnowledgeMAI-Thinking-1 wins14 benchmarks
| Benchmark | MAI-Thinking-1 | Qwen3.6 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 84.2% | 90.4% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| GPQA-DSource | 84.2% | — | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ProSource | 85% | 88.5% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| SimpleQASource | 31% | — | Not comparable |
| SuperGPQASource | — | 71.6% | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ReduxSource | — | 94.5% | Not comparable |
| C-EvalSource | — | 93.3% | 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 |
MathMAI-Thinking-1 wins8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | MAI-Thinking-1 | Qwen3.6 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME 2025Source | 97% | — | Not comparable |
| AIME26Source | 94.5% | 95.3% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| HMMT Feb 2026Source | 84.9% | 87.8% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| 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 | MAI-Thinking-1 | 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 (6)
Which is better, MAI-Thinking-1 or Qwen3.6 Plus?
MAI-Thinking-1 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, MAI-Thinking-1 or Qwen3.6 Plus?
MAI-Thinking-1 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 72.5 versus 57.1. Inside this category, GPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, MAI-Thinking-1 or Qwen3.6 Plus?
Qwen3.6 Plus has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 70.3 versus 65.5. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for math, MAI-Thinking-1 or Qwen3.6 Plus?
MAI-Thinking-1 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 89.7 versus 60.5. Inside this category, HMMT Feb 2026 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, MAI-Thinking-1 or Qwen3.6 Plus?
Qwen3.6 Plus has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 61.6 versus 46. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for instruction following, MAI-Thinking-1 or Qwen3.6 Plus?
MAI-Thinking-1 has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 85 versus 82.3. Inside this category, IFBench is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
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.