Nemotron 3.5 Super VL vs Qwen3.6 27B
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL leads Qwen3.6 27B on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 26.5 to 21.4, and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL costs 5.4x less per output token ($0.50 vs $2.70 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 4 benchmarks have a result for both.
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL or Qwen3.6 27B: which to pick
Only Qwen3.6 27B has a coding score, 36.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; Nemotron 3.5 Super VL has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Nemotron 3.5 Super VL for output tokens 5.4x cheaper ($0.50 vs $2.70 per million) and a larger context window (1.05M against 262K tokens).
- Shared results
- 4
- Nemotron 3.5 Super VL only
- 12
- Qwen3.6 27B only
- 21
- Like-for-like categories
- 4 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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Only Qwen3.6 27B has a coding score, so no call is made.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL leads, 26.5 against 21.4.
Same board, both measured
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
No call
Only Qwen3.6 27B has a AA Agentic Index result, 18.5.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
No call
Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL has a Design Arena: websites result, 1173.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL takes 1.05M tokens against 262K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL $0.0004, Qwen3.6 27B $0.0018 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
No call
Only Qwen3.6 27B has the number, $1.30.
Directional only
At a glance
- Coding index
- Nemotron 3.5 Super VL not benchmarked, Qwen3.6 27B 36.8 from 2 benchmarks.
- Widest category
- General, 8.3 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- Long context reasoning (AA-LCR): Nemotron 3.5 Super VL 69.0% against Qwen3.6 27B 77.3%, 8.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Nemotron 3.5 Super VL $0.50 against Qwen3.6 27B $2.70 per million output tokens, 5.4x apart.
- Context window
- Nemotron 3.5 Super VL takes 1.05M 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.
| Category | Nemotron 3.5 Super VL | Bars | Qwen3.6 27B | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 1 | 0 | ||
| Intelligence | 1 | 0 | ||
| Reasoning | 1 | 0 | ||
| General | 0 | 1 | ||
| All shared boards | 3 | 1 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index10
| Benchmark | Nemotron 3.5 Super VL | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench coding | 65.5% | Not measured | Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured |
| AA Coding Index | Not measured | 53.7 | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | Not measured | 70.0% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 11.9% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| SciCode | 47.8% | 42.8% | Nemotron 3.5 Super VL |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 34.8% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | Nemotron 3.5 Super VL | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 26.5 | 21.4 | Nemotron 3.5 Super VL |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | Not measured | 146.2 | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Nemotron 3.5 Super VL | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | Not measured | 18.5 | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| LiveBench research | 70.9% | Not measured | Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured |
| LiveBench browser | 4.0% | Not measured | Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured |
| LiveBench long agentic | 15.8% | Not measured | Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | Not measured | 94.2% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | Nemotron 3.5 Super VL | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench reasoning | 78.8% | Not measured | Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 84.2% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 30.7% | 23.1% | Nemotron 3.5 Super VL |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | Not measured | 85.9% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| Mystery game puzzles | Not measured | 7.0% | 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
| Benchmark | Nemotron 3.5 Super VL | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME | Not measured | 91.1% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | Not measured | 35.1% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Nemotron 3.5 Super VL | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| CaseLaw (Vals AI) | Not measured | 53.2% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | Not measured | 62.3% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | Not measured | 71.3% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| MortgageTax (Vals AI) | Not measured | 68.3% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Nemotron 3.5 Super VL | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | 1173 | Not measured | Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured |
| Design Arena: UI components | 1149 | Not measured | Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured |
| Design Arena: game dev | 1110 | Not measured | Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured |
| Design Arena: 3D | 1128 | Not measured | Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured |
| Design Arena: all code categories | 1154 | Not measured | Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured |
| LiveBench design | 60.7% | Not measured | Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Nemotron 3.5 Super VL | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench data analysis | 64.6% | Not measured | Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured |
| SAGE (Vals AI) | Not measured | 45.6% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| IFBench | Not measured | 67.6% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 69.0% | 77.3% | Qwen3.6 27B |
| DTBench | Not measured | 78.1% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| LMCA | Not measured | 34.5% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| EQ-Bench 4 | Not measured | 1026 | 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
| Benchmark | Nemotron 3.5 Super VL | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL 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.
| Specification | NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Super VL | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | NVIDIA | Qwen |
| Weights | Open weights | Open weights |
| Released | October 15, 2026 | April 27, 2026 |
| Context window | 1.05M | 262K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.15 | $0.45 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.50 | $2.70 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | 36.8 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 1 | 2 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | $1.30 |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Nemotron 3.5 Super VL better than Qwen3.6 27B for coding?
Only Qwen3.6 27B has a coding score, 36.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; Nemotron 3.5 Super VL has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Nemotron 3.5 Super VL for output tokens 5.4x cheaper ($0.50 vs $2.70 per million) and a larger context window (1.05M against 262K tokens).
Which is cheaper, Nemotron 3.5 Super VL or Qwen3.6 27B?
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL costs $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.50 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, Nemotron 3.5 Super VL or Qwen3.6 27B?
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks is the Nemotron 3.5 Super VL vs Qwen3.6 27B comparison based on?
4 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Nemotron 3.5 Super VL's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Qwen3.6 27B's on 2. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.