Model Comparison
LFM2 2.6B
vs. Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Reasoning)
Comparing 2 AI models · 10 benchmarks · Liquid AI, Alibaba
Recommended Pick
Al Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Reasoning) 11 metric wins Strongest on: Throughput, Reasoning, Intelligence
Lowest Price
LFM2 2.6B
$0.00/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Reasoning)
49.3 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Reasoning)
35.2 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Price gap
LFM2 2.6B is ∞x cheaper on input tokens than Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Reasoning).
Reasoning gap
Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Reasoning) leads LFM2 2.6B by 37.2 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Reasoning) leads LFM2 2.6B by 33.8 points on coding.
Top-pick rationale
Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Reasoning) wins 11 measurable categories, including Throughput, Reasoning, Intelligence, Coding.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
LFM2 2.6B
Liquid AI
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Reasoning)
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | Li LFM2 2.6B | Top Pick Al Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.00/1M | $0.25/1M |
| Output Cost | $0.00/1M | $1.49/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | — | $0.56/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Liquid AI | Alibaba |
| Release Date | Sep 23, 2025 | Apr 16, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | — | 161.1 tok/s |
| TTFT | — | 1320ms |
| Latency | — | 34805ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | — | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 12.1 | 49.3 |
| Intelligence | 8.0 | 43.5 |
| Coding | 1.4 | 35.2 |
| Math | 8.3 | — |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 30.6% | 84.1% |
| MMLU Pro | 29.8% | — |
| HLE | 5.2% | 20.2% |
| LiveCodeBench | 8.1% | — |
| AIME 2025 | 8.3% | — |
| SciCode | 2.5% | 35.8% |
| LCR | 0.0% | 63.7% |
| IFBench | 19.5% | 64.4% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 13.5% | 95.3% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 0.8% | 34.8% |
Key Takeaways
LFM2 2.6B offers the best value at $0.00/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Reasoning) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 49.3 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Reasoning) reaches a 35.2 coding index, making it the top choice for software development and code generation tasks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens, suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
LFM2 2.6B
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Reasoning)
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
