Model Comparison
Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Non-reasoning)
vs. Solar Pro 2 (Non-reasoning)
Comparing 2 AI models · 12 benchmarks · Alibaba, Upstage
Recommended Pick
Al Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Non-reasoning) 10 metric wins Strongest on: Throughput, Reasoning, Intelligence
Lowest Price
Solar Pro 2 (Non-reasoning)
$0.00/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Non-reasoning)
41.9 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Non-reasoning)
17.6 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
Solar Pro 2 (Non-reasoning) is ∞x cheaper on input tokens than Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Non-reasoning).
Reasoning gap
Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Non-reasoning) leads Solar Pro 2 (Non-reasoning) by 4.3 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Non-reasoning) leads Solar Pro 2 (Non-reasoning) by 6.3 points on coding.
Top-pick rationale
Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Non-reasoning) wins 10 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.
Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Non-reasoning)
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Solar Pro 2 (Non-reasoning)
Upstage
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | Top Pick Al Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Non-reasoning) | Up Solar Pro 2 (Non-reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.38/1M | $0.00/1M |
| Output Cost | $2.25/1M | $0.00/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.84/1M | — |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Alibaba | Upstage |
| Release Date | Apr 16, 2026 | Jul 9, 2025 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 184.0 tok/s | — |
| TTFT | 1414ms | — |
| Latency | 1414ms | — |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 100.0 | — |
| Reasoning Score | 41.9 | 37.6 |
| Intelligence | 31.5 | 13.6 |
| Coding | 17.6 | 11.3 |
| Math | — | 30.0 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 81.7% | 56.1% |
| MMLU Pro | — | 75.0% |
| HLE | 12.5% | 3.8% |
| LiveCodeBench | — | 42.4% |
| MATH 500 | — | 88.9% |
| AIME 2025 | — | 30.0% |
| AIME (Original) | — | 40.7% |
| SciCode | 1.3% | 24.8% |
| LCR | 56.7% | 0.0% |
| IFBench | 36.2% | 33.7% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 85.1% | 31.9% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 25.8% | 4.5% |
Key Takeaways
Solar Pro 2 (Non-reasoning) offers the best value at $0.00/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Non-reasoning) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 41.9 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Non-reasoning) reaches a 17.6 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 35B A3B (Non-reasoning)
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
Solar Pro 2 (Non-reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
