Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Mixtral 8x22B Instruct vs Qwen3.6 27B

Qwen3.6 27B leads Mixtral 8x22B Instruct on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 21.4 to 5.7, and Qwen3.6 27B costs 2.2x less per output token ($2.70 vs $6.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 5 benchmarks have a result for both.

Mixtral 8x22B InstructMistral AI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$6.00
0
Qwen3.6 27BQwen
Coding
36.8
Overall
45.3
Output $/M
$2.70
5
vs boards won of 5 shared

Mixtral 8x22B Instruct or Qwen3.6 27B: which to pick

Only Qwen3.6 27B has a coding score, 36.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; Mixtral 8x22B Instruct has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

Shared results
5
Mixtral 8x22B Instruct only
3
Qwen3.6 27B only
19
Like-for-like categories
3 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
Mixtral 8x22B Instruct not benchmarked, Qwen3.6 27B 36.8 from 2 benchmarks.
Widest category
Reasoning, 35.0 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run): Mixtral 8x22B Instruct 33.2% against Qwen3.6 27B 84.2%, 51.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Mixtral 8x22B Instruct $6.00 against Qwen3.6 27B $2.70 per million output tokens, 2.2x apart.
Context window
Mixtral 8x22B Instruct takes 66K tokens, Qwen3.6 27B 262K.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryMixtral 8x22B InstructBarsQwen3.6 27BTies
Intelligence02
Reasoning02
General01
All shared boards05
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index7 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for Mixtral 8x22B Instruct and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkMixtral 8x22B InstructQwen3.6 27BLeader
AA Coding IndexNot measured53.7Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured70.0%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured11.9%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)14.8%Not measuredOnly Mixtral 8x22B Instruct measured
SciCodeNot measured42.8%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured34.8%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
SciCode0.0%Not measuredOnly Mixtral 8x22B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 32 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Intelligence benchmarks for Mixtral 8x22B Instruct and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkMixtral 8x22B InstructQwen3.6 27BLeader
AA Intelligence Index5.721.4Qwen3.6 27B
Epoch Capabilities Index122.0146.2Qwen3.6 27B
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Mixtral 8x22B Instruct and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkMixtral 8x22B InstructQwen3.6 27BLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured18.5Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured94.2%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Reasoning benchmarks for Mixtral 8x22B Instruct and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkMixtral 8x22B InstructQwen3.6 27BLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)33.2%84.2%Qwen3.6 27B
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)4.0%23.1%Qwen3.6 27B
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured85.9%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured7.0%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 18 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for Mixtral 8x22B Instruct and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkMixtral 8x22B InstructQwen3.6 27BLeader
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured91.1%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3Not measured35.1%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for Mixtral 8x22B Instruct and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkMixtral 8x22B InstructQwen3.6 27BLeader
CaseLaw (Vals AI)Not measured53.2%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured62.3%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured71.3%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured68.3%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)53.7%Not measuredOnly Mixtral 8x22B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Mixtral 8x22B Instruct and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkMixtral 8x22B InstructQwen3.6 27BLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
General benchmarks for Mixtral 8x22B Instruct and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkMixtral 8x22B InstructQwen3.6 27BLeader
SAGE (Vals AI)Not measured45.6%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
IFBenchNot measured67.6%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured77.3%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
DTBench55.1%78.1%Qwen3.6 27B
LMCANot measured34.5%Only Qwen3.6 27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 41 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Mixtral 8x22B Instruct and Qwen3.6 27B
BenchmarkMixtral 8x22B InstructQwen3.6 27BLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

Mixtral 8x22B Instruct$0.0050Fits in one request
Qwen3.6 27B$0.0018Fits in one request

Qwen3.6 27B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Mixtral 8x22B Instruct$0.118Fits in one request
Qwen3.6 27B$0.031Fits in one request

Qwen3.6 27B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Mixtral 8x22B Instruct$0.460Exceeds the context window
Qwen3.6 27B$0.117Fits in one request

Qwen3.6 27B costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of Mixtral 8x22B Instruct and Qwen3.6 27B
SpecificationMistral Mixtral 8x22B InstructQwen3.6 27B
MakerMistral AIQwen
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedApril 17, 2024April 27, 2026
Context window66K262K
Input $/Mtok$2.00$0.45
Output $/Mtok$6.00$2.70
Coding indexNot benchmarked36.8
Independent measurements behind it02
Cost per solved taskNot computable$1.30
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Mixtral 8x22B Instruct better than Qwen3.6 27B for coding?

Only Qwen3.6 27B has a coding score, 36.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; Mixtral 8x22B Instruct has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

Which is cheaper, Mixtral 8x22B Instruct or Qwen3.6 27B?

Mixtral 8x22B Instruct costs $2.00 per million input tokens and $6.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 27B costs $0.45 and $2.70. Cost per solved task is known for Qwen3.6 27B only.

Which has the bigger context window, Mixtral 8x22B Instruct or Qwen3.6 27B?

Qwen3.6 27B, with 262K tokens against 66K.

How many benchmarks is the Mixtral 8x22B Instruct vs Qwen3.6 27B comparison based on?

5 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Mixtral 8x22B Instruct's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen3.6 27B's on 2. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next