ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 vs Qwen3.6 35B-A3B

Qwen3.6 35B-A3B comes out ahead, 63 to 55 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507

    Released Jul 25, 2025

    55/100
    • ECI143.8
    • Price$0.30 / $2.90
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507
  2. Our pick

    Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.6 35B-A3B

    Released Apr 17, 2026

    63/100
    • ECI143.8
    • Price$0.375 / $2.25
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3.6 35B-A3B

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Qwen3.6 35B-A3B is our pick

Qwen3.6 35B-A3B is the better all-round choice, scoring 63/100 against Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 (55). It leads on price and inputs & features. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityQwen3.6 35B-A3BCapabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3.6 35B-A3B 143.8 · Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 143.8
  • Lowest priceQwen3.6 35B-A3BQwen3.6 35B-A3B $0.844 · Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 $0.95 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextAbout the sameQwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 262,144 · Qwen3.6 35B-A3B 262,144 tokens
  • Widest inputsQwen3.6 35B-A3BQwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507: Text · Qwen3.6 35B-A3B: Text, Images, Video
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightQwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507Qwen3.6 35B-A3B
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%6969
Price25%4951
Inputs & features15%3580
Context window10%3737
Overall100%55/10063/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 vs Qwen3.6 35B-A3B specifications side by side
SpecificationQwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen3.6 35B-A3BAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)143.8143.8 (best)
ECI rank#93 of 165#92 of 165 (best)
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions80.1%84.9% (best)
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics—20.4%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics86.7%86.7%
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions40.4%—
Price per million tokens
Input$0.30 (best)$0.375
Output$2.90$2.25 (best)
Cached input——
Blended (3:1)$0.95$0.844 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 11 providersOfficial Alibaba API
Limits
Context window262,144 tokens262,144 tokens
Max output81,920 tokens (best)65,536 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesNoYes
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoNo
VideoNoYes
ReasoningYesYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoYes
Availability
WeightsOpenApache 2.0Open
API model ID—qwen3.6-35b-a3b
API providers1238 (best)
ReleasedJul 25, 2025Apr 17, 2026
Knowledge cutoff——
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507$8.80
  • Qwen3.6 35B-A3B$8.25
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 or Qwen3.6 35B-A3B?

Qwen3.6 35B-A3B is the better all-round choice, scoring 63/100 against Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 (55). It leads on price and inputs & features. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 or Qwen3.6 35B-A3B?

Qwen3.6 35B-A3B is cheaper at $0.375 input / $2.25 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 costs $0.30 input / $2.90 output per million tokens (median across 11 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.844 per million tokens for Qwen3.6 35B-A3B versus $0.95 for Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 (1.1× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Qwen3.6 35B-A3B scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3.6 35B-A3B 143.8 (#92 of 165) and Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 143.8 (#93 of 165). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (141.1–146.0 vs 141.9–145.2), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Qwen3.6 35B-A3B 84.9%, Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 80.1%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 86.7%, Qwen3.6 35B-A3B 86.7%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 and Qwen3.6 35B-A3B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Qwen3.6 35B-A3B leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 and Qwen3.6 35B-A3B share the same 262,144-token context window. Maximum output per response: Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 up to 81,920, Qwen3.6 35B-A3B up to 65,536 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 accepts text; Qwen3.6 35B-A3B accepts text, images and video. Qwen3.6 35B-A3B handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Yes, both publish their weights (Apache 2.0), so you can self-host them.

Which is newer?

Qwen3.6 35B-A3B is the newest, released Apr 17, 2026. Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 came out Jul 25, 2025.

How do you decide the winner?

Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Nov 2, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons