Model Comparison
Qwen3.6 27B (Non-reasoning)
vs. Qwen3 Max
Comparing 2 AI models · 10 benchmarks · Alibaba
Recommended Pick
AlQwen3.6 27B (Non-reasoning)14 metric winsStrongest on: Value, Input price, Output price
Best Value
Qwen3.6 27B (Non-reasoning)
100.0 value score
42.3 reasoning / $1.35/1M
Lowest Price
Qwen3.6 27B (Non-reasoning)
$0.60/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Qwen3 Max
54.6 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Qwen3.6 27B (Non-reasoning)
46.6 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Best value
Qwen3.6 27B (Non-reasoning) has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
Qwen3.6 27B (Non-reasoning) is 2.0x cheaper on input tokens than Qwen3 Max.
Speed gap
Qwen3.6 27B (Non-reasoning) generates about 1.3x as many tokens per second as Qwen3 Max.
Reasoning gap
Qwen3 Max leads Qwen3.6 27B (Non-reasoning) by 12.2 points on reasoning.
Top-pick rationale
Qwen3.6 27B (Non-reasoning) wins 14 measurable categories, including Value, Input price, Output price, Blended price.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Qwen3.6 27B (Non-reasoning)
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Qwen3 Max
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Chat with leading AI models
Use Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini alongside with EU-Hosted Models like Deepseek, Qwen & Kimi.
EU-hosted inference
Servers in Germany & Finland. Designed to meet strict GDPR and ISO 27001 compliance requirements.
Full Comparison
| Metric | Top Pick Al Qwen3.6 27B (Non-reasoning) | Al Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.60/1M | $1.20/1M |
| Output Cost | $3.60/1M | $6.00/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $1.35/1M | $2.40/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Alibaba | Alibaba |
| Release Date | Apr 22, 2026 | Sep 23, 2025 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 63.3 tok/s | 48.1 tok/s |
| TTFT | 1354ms | 1948ms |
| Latency | 1354ms | 1948ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 100.0 | 72.5 |
| Reasoning Score | 42.3 | 54.6 |
| Intelligence | 30.5 | 24.0 |
| Coding | 46.6 | — |
| Math | — | 80.7 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 82.9% | 76.4% |
| MMLU Pro | — | 84.1% |
| HLE | 13.6% | 11.1% |
| LiveCodeBench | — | 76.7% |
| AIME 2025 | — | 80.7% |
| SciCode | 37.3% | 38.3% |
| LCR | 55.0% | 46.7% |
| IFBench | 45.7% | 44.1% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 93.6% | 74.3% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 21.2% | 20.5% |
Key Takeaways
Qwen3.6 27B (Non-reasoning) offers the best value at $0.60/1M,making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Qwen3 Max has the strongest reasoning profile with a 54.6 reasoning score,combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Qwen3.6 27B (Non-reasoning) reaches a 46.6 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
Qwen3.6 27B (Non-reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Code generation
- Software development
Qwen3 Max
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
