Model profile
Qwen3.6 Plus
Evidence coverage
60 of 323 tracked benchmarks are published. 42 are verified and 18 provisional. 8 of 8 categories are measured.
- Published / tracked
- 60 / 323
- Verified
- 42
- Provisional
- 18
- Categories with evidence
- 8 / 8
Evidence by category
- Agentic16 benchmarksMixed evidence
- Coding7 benchmarksMixed evidence
- Reasoning4 benchmarksMixed evidence
- Knowledge12 benchmarksMixed evidence
- Math7 benchmarksVerified
- Multilingual2 benchmarksVerified
- Multimodal9 benchmarksMixed evidence
- Inst. Following3 benchmarksMixed evidence
Qwen3.6 Plus ranks #30 out of 200 models on the public leaderboard with an overall score of 65.2/100. It also ranks #25 out of 99 on the verified leaderboard. This places it in the mid-tier of AI models, with strengths in specific benchmark categories.
Qwen3.6 Plus is a proprietary model with a 1M token context window. It uses explicit chain-of-thought reasoning, which typically improves performance on math and complex reasoning tasks at the cost of higher latency and token usage.
This profile currently has 60 of 323 tracked benchmarks. BenchLM only exposes non-generated benchmark rows publicly, so missing categories stay blank until a sourced evaluation is available.
Its strongest category is Multilingual (#4), while its weakest is Agentic (#103). This performance profile makes it a well-rounded choice across a range of tasks.
Peer position
Exact provisional scores and ranks for the closest listed peers. A score can appear before a model clears the evidence threshold for a rank, so equal scores can have different rank states.
Range 64.22–66.06
- GLM-5Z.AICompare#2866.06GLM-5 is #28 with a score of 66.06.
- Claude Sonnet 5AnthropicCompare#2965.32Claude Sonnet 5 is #29 with a score of 65.32.
- Qwen3.6 PlusCurrent modelAlibaba#3065.2Qwen3.6 Plus is #30 with a score of 65.2.
- Grok 4.3xAICompare#3165.1Grok 4.3 is #31 with a score of 65.1.
- Claude Sonnet 4.6AnthropicCompare#3265.07Claude Sonnet 4.6 is #32 with a score of 65.07.
- Gemini 3.5 FlashGoogleCompare#3364.75Gemini 3.5 Flash is #33 with a score of 64.75.
- Claude Opus 4.5AnthropicCompare#3464.22Claude Opus 4.5 is #34 with a score of 64.22.
Category percentile
More
Relative position among models eligible for each sourced category. A higher percentile means a stronger position within that category's ranked cohort; 100 is highest.
- Multilingual75%Eligible cohort rank #4 of 13Category score 69.7
- Math50%Eligible cohort rank #4 of 7Category score 63.0
- Inst. Following57%Eligible cohort rank #14 of 31Category score 86.4
- Multimodal46%Eligible cohort rank #16 of 29Category score 66.5
- Knowledge24%Eligible cohort rank #40 of 52Category score 59.5
- Coding68%Eligible cohort rank #40 of 122Category score 53.8
- Agentic14%Eligible cohort rank #103 of 119Category score 37.2
Category evidence
Scores and ranks appear only where this model has published benchmark evidence. Categories without displayable source records remain not measured.
| Category | Score | Rank | Percentile | Weight | Benchmarks | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AgenticRank #103 of 119Percentile 14thWeight 22%16 benchmarksMixed sources | 37.2 | #103 of 119 | 14th | 22% | 16 benchmarks | Mixed sources |
| CodingRank #40 of 122Percentile 68thWeight 20%7 benchmarksMixed sources | 53.8 | #40 of 122 | 68th | 20% | 7 benchmarks | Mixed sources |
| ReasoningRank Not rankedWeight 17%4 benchmarksMixed sources | 82.6 | Not ranked | Not available | 17% | 4 benchmarks | Mixed sources |
| KnowledgeRank #40 of 52Percentile 24thWeight 12%12 benchmarksMixed sources | 59.5 | #40 of 52 | 24th | 12% | 12 benchmarks | Mixed sources |
| MathRank #4 of 7Percentile 50thWeight 5%7 benchmarksVerified | 63.0 | #4 of 7 | 50th | 5% | 7 benchmarks | Verified |
| MultilingualRank #4 of 13Percentile 75thWeight 7%2 benchmarksVerified | 69.7 | #4 of 13 | 75th | 7% | 2 benchmarks | Verified |
| MultimodalRank #16 of 29Percentile 46thWeight 12%9 benchmarksMixed sources | 66.5 | #16 of 29 | 46th | 12% | 9 benchmarks | Mixed sources |
| Inst. FollowingRank #14 of 31Percentile 57thWeight 5%3 benchmarksMixed sources | 86.4 | #14 of 31 | 57th | 5% | 3 benchmarks | Mixed sources |
Chatbot Arena performance
Scroll horizontally to inspect confidence intervals and vote counts.
| View | Elo | Confidence interval | Votes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Text Overall | 1444 | ±4.3 | 43,163 |
| Coding | 1494 | ±6.6 | 13,092 |
| Math | 1454 | ±12.3 | 2,396 |
| Instruction Following | 1436 | ±6.3 | 14,430 |
| Creative Writing | 1408 | ±8.4 | 6,321 |
| Multi-turn | 1447 | ±7.9 | 7,567 |
| Hard Prompts | 1467 | ±5.1 | 28,912 |
| Hard Prompts (English) | 1475 | ±6.4 | 13,875 |
| Longer Query | 1454 | ±6.0 | 18,273 |
Benchmark Details
Rows below have a displayable published verification record. Each source link and provenance note remains in the page HTML while its category is closed. Source-unverified manual rows and generated rows stay hidden.
Agentic16 benchmarks
τ³-Bench Tool-Agent-User Evaluation
Artificial Analysis Agentic Index
τ²-Bench Tool-Agent-User Evaluation
GDPval-AA normalized
Gert Labs Composite Game Benchmark
Coding7 benchmarks
Software Engineering Benchmark Verified
Vibe Code Bench v1.1
Artificial Analysis Coding Index
Artificial Analysis SciCode
Reasoning4 benchmarks
Artificial Analysis Long Context Reasoning
Critical Physics Tasks
Knowledge12 benchmarks
Humanity's Last Exam
Massive Multitask Language Understanding Professional
Graduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A
SuperGPQA: Scaling LLM Evaluation Across 285 Graduate Disciplines
Artificial Analysis GPQA Diamond
Artificial Analysis Humanity's Last Exam
Artificial Analysis Omniscience Index
Artificial Analysis Omniscience Accuracy
Artificial Analysis Omniscience Hallucination Rate
Math7 benchmarks
FrontierMath v2 Tiers 1-3
Harvard-MIT Mathematics Tournament February 2026
FrontierMath v2 Tier 4
Harvard-MIT Mathematics Tournament February 2025
Harvard-MIT Mathematics Tournament November 2025
Multilingual2 benchmarks
Multimodal9 benchmarks
Massive Multi-discipline Multimodal Understanding Pro
CharXiv Reasoning
Massive Multi-discipline Multimodal Understanding
Artificial Analysis MMMU-Pro
Design Arena Website Elo
Inst. Following3 benchmarks
Instruction Following Benchmark
Instruction-Following Eval
Artificial Analysis IFBench
Frequently Asked Questions
How does Qwen3.6 Plus perform overall in AI benchmarks?
Qwen3.6 Plus currently ranks #30 out of 200 models on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard with an overall score of 65.2. It also ranks #25 out of 99 on the verified leaderboard. It is created by Alibaba. Its published context window is 1M.
Is Qwen3.6 Plus good for knowledge and understanding?
Qwen3.6 Plus ranks #40 out of 52 models in knowledge and understanding benchmarks with an average score of 59.5. There are stronger options in this category.
Is Qwen3.6 Plus good for coding and programming?
Qwen3.6 Plus ranks #40 out of 122 models in coding and programming benchmarks with an average score of 53.8. There are stronger options in this category.
Is Qwen3.6 Plus good for mathematics?
Qwen3.6 Plus ranks #4 out of 7 models in mathematics benchmarks with an average score of 63. It is among the top performers in this category.
Is Qwen3.6 Plus good for reasoning and logic?
Qwen3.6 Plus has visible benchmark coverage in reasoning and logic, but BenchLM does not currently assign it a global category rank there.
Is Qwen3.6 Plus good for agentic tool use and computer tasks?
Qwen3.6 Plus ranks #103 out of 119 models in agentic tool use and computer tasks benchmarks with an average score of 37.2. There are stronger options in this category.
Is Qwen3.6 Plus good for multimodal and grounded tasks?
Qwen3.6 Plus ranks #16 out of 29 models in multimodal and grounded tasks benchmarks with an average score of 66.5. There are stronger options in this category.
Is Qwen3.6 Plus good for instruction following?
Qwen3.6 Plus ranks #14 out of 31 models in instruction following benchmarks with an average score of 86.4. There are stronger options in this category.
Is Qwen3.6 Plus good for multilingual tasks?
Qwen3.6 Plus ranks #4 out of 13 models in multilingual tasks benchmarks with an average score of 69.7. It is among the top performers in this category.
Does Qwen3.6 Plus have full benchmark coverage on BenchLM?
Not yet. Qwen3.6 Plus currently has 60 published benchmark scores out of the 323 benchmarks BenchLM tracks. BenchLM only exposes non-generated public benchmark rows, so missing categories stay blank until a sourced evaluation is available.
What is the context window size of Qwen3.6 Plus?
Qwen3.6 Plus has a published context window of 1M, which determines how much text it can process in a single interaction.
Related Resources
Choose with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, new releases, pricing changes, and the evidence behind them.
Free. One email per week.