whichllmmodel
Back to Dashboard
Alibaba Cloud (Qwen)

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B

VS
Anthropic

Claude Sonnet 4.6

✍️ Analysis by:the whichllmmodel Editorial Team|📅 Updated: June 2026

Decision Recommendation

👑 Editorial Verdict: Qwen3.6-35B-A3B strictly dominates Claude Sonnet 4.6 across all major dimensions. It is not only more cost-effective (blended cost of $0.56 vs $6.00 per 1M tokens) but also delivers superior coding accuracy (49.5% vs 0% on SWE-bench) and faster generation speeds (128 tps vs 54.3 tps). Unless you have platform lock-in, Qwen3.6-35B-A3B is the clear and optimal choice for all development workloads.

Model Specs

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B

Benchmarks & Scores

Coding (swe-bench-pro)Winner (+)
49.5%
Reasoning (gpqa-diamond)Winner (+6.1%)
86%

Cost & Performance

Cost (per 1M tokens)10.7x cheaper
$0.56Input: $0.25 | Output: $1.50
Speed2.4x faster
128 tps
Context Window
1M tokens
Model Specs

Claude Sonnet 4.6

Benchmarks & Scores

Coding (swe-bench-pro)
N/A
Reasoning (gpqa-diamond)
79.9%

Cost & Performance

Cost (per 1M tokens)
$6.00Input: $3.00 | Output: $15.00
Speed
54.3 tps
Context Window
1M tokens
Read our data collection methodology

Frequently Asked Questions

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B is cheaper than Claude Sonnet 4.6. Qwen3.6-35B-A3B has a blended cost of $0.56/1M tokens, which is about 10.7x cheaper than Claude Sonnet 4.6 at $6.00/1M tokens.

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B is faster than Claude Sonnet 4.6. Qwen3.6-35B-A3B generates 128 tokens per second (tps) compared to Claude Sonnet 4.6 which generates 54.3 tokens per second.

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B is better for coding tasks. It scores 49.5% on coding evaluations (swe-bench-pro) compared to Claude Sonnet 4.6 which scores N/A.

Want to customize weights or add more models?

Open our interactive dashboard where you can adjust your priority levels for speed, budget, or accuracy slider-bars and watch model rankings calculate dynamically.

Customize in Interactive Dashboard