o1 vs Qwen3.6 Plus
Wins 0 of 8 areas
—
Wins 8 of 8 areas
Coding · Agents · Reasoning · Facts · Images and charts · Math · Long documents · Following instructions
Qwen3.6 Plus is the stronger all-rounder.
Scores updated · 21 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the eight areas we test. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- CodingWriting and fixing software03Qwen3.6 Plus3 of 3 tests
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking03Qwen3.6 Plus3 of 3 tests
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up12Qwen3.6 Plus2 of 3 tests
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own01Qwen3.6 Plus1 of 1 test
- Images and chartsUnderstanding pictures, charts and video01Qwen3.6 Plus1 of 1 test
- MathCompetition and research-level math01Qwen3.6 Plus1 of 1 test
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts01Qwen3.6 Plus1 of 1 test
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked01Qwen3.6 Plus1 of 1 test
Agents, images and charts, math, long documents and following instructions rest on a single test each.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
Qwen3.6 Plus costs 95% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The tests each model wins by the widest margin, up to three each. Scores are out of 100.
Where Qwen3.6 Plus pulls ahead
- Fixes real GitHub issues in Python projectsSWE-bench Verified+37.5points ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+35points ahead
- Hard command-line tasks in a real terminalTerminal-Bench Hard+31points ahead
Where o1 pulls ahead
- Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+8.1points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 21 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingQwen3.6 Plus
- SWE-bench VerifiedQwen3.6 Plus by 37.541.378.8+37.5
- Terminal-Bench HardQwen3.6 Plus by 3112.943.9+31
- SciCodeQwen3.6 Plus by 4.935.840.7+4.9
ReasoningQwen3.6 Plus
- Humanity's Last ExamQwen3.6 Plus by 20.8727.8+20.8
- GPQA DiamondQwen3.6 Plus by 13.574.788.2+13.5
- CritPtQwen3.6 Plus by 2.60.32.9+2.6
FactsQwen3.6 Plus
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationQwen3.6 Plus by 3530.465.4+35
- AA-Omniscience · Accuracyo1 by 8.134.526.4+8.1
- SimpleQA VerifiedQwen3.6 Plus by 341.144.1+3
Following instructionsQwen3.6 Plus
- IFBenchQwen3.6 Plus by 4.970.375.2+4.9
Other results7 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- τ²-Bench Telecom (AA run)Qwen3.6 Plus by 35.162.697.7+35.1
- LiveBenchQwen3.6 Plus by 18.652.370.8+18.6
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexQwen3.6 Plus by 14.839.754.5+14.8
- AA-OmniscienceQwen3.6 Plus by 11.9-11.10.9+11.9
- AA IntelligenceQwen3.6 Plus by 11.815.227+11.8
- AA Agentic Indexo1 by 2.131.129+2.1
- MMMLUQwen3.6 Plus by 1.887.789.5+1.8
Questions people ask
Which is better, o1 or Qwen3.6 Plus?
Qwen3.6 Plus wins all eight areas we test: coding, agents, reasoning, facts, images and charts, math, long documents and following instructions. o1 wins none.
Which is better for coding?
Qwen3.6 Plus. It wins 3 of the 3 coding tests both models report; o1 wins none.
Which is cheaper?
o1 costs $15.00 per million input tokens and $60.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 Plus costs $0.50 and $3.00. That makes Qwen3.6 Plus about 95% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 21 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 14 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 7 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.