Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

o1 vs Qwen3.6 Plus

Qwen3.6 Plus leads o1 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 27.0 to 15.2, and Qwen3.6 Plus costs 30.8x less per output token ($1.95 vs $60.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 50 benchmarks have a result for both.

o1OpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
44.6
Output $/M
$60.00
1
Qwen3.6 PlusQwen
Coding
44.1
Overall
56.2
Output $/M
$1.95
49
vs boards won of 50 shared

o1 or Qwen3.6 Plus: which to pick

Only Qwen3.6 Plus has a coding score, 44.1 on the Vibe Coding Index; o1 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick o1 for work measured by LMArena Text: Korean, where it leads.

Shared results
50
o1 only
19
Qwen3.6 Plus only
33
Like-for-like categories
7 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
o1 not benchmarked, Qwen3.6 Plus 44.1 from 3 benchmarks.
Widest category
Agentic work, 35.1 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI): o1 50.3% against Qwen3.6 Plus 86.0%, 35.7 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
o1 $60.00 against Qwen3.6 Plus $1.95 per million output tokens, 30.8x apart.
Context window
o1 takes 200K tokens, Qwen3.6 Plus 1M.

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
Categoryo1BarsQwen3.6 PlusTies
Coding05
Intelligence02
Agentic work01
Reasoning09
Math05
Knowledge08
General119
All shared boards149
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index05
Coding benchmarks for o1 and Qwen3.6 Plus
Benchmarko1Qwen3.6 PlusLeader
Aider polyglot61.7%Not measuredOnly o1 measured
LMArena WebDevNot measured1461Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
AA Coding Index39.754.5Qwen3.6 Plus
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)50.3%86.0%Qwen3.6 Plus
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured73.4%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured25.6%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Code migration (Vals AI)Not measured11.1%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)Not measured0.0%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)Not measured53.2%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)67.9%Not measuredOnly o1 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)12.9%43.9%Qwen3.6 Plus
WeirdML46.1%Not measuredOnly o1 measured
ALE-BenchNot measured670.1Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena Text: coding13671467Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: software and IT13661462Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1454Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1463Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena WebDev: from an imageNot measured1472Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
SciCode4.6%Not measuredOnly o1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 20 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Intelligence benchmarks for o1 and Qwen3.6 Plus
Benchmarko1Qwen3.6 PlusLeader
AA Intelligence Index15.227.0Qwen3.6 Plus
Epoch Capabilities Index141.7147.3Qwen3.6 Plus
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for o1 and Qwen3.6 Plus
Benchmarko1Qwen3.6 PlusLeader
Finance Agent (Vals AI)Not measured40.9%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)Not measured7.7%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)Not measured14.9%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)Not measured32.9%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
τ²-Bench Telecom62.6%97.7%Qwen3.6 Plus
METR time horizons51.1%Not measuredOnly o1 measured
Vending-Bench 2Not measured$5,115Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index09
Reasoning benchmarks for o1 and Qwen3.6 Plus
Benchmarko1Qwen3.6 PlusLeader
GPQA Diamond73.2%87.4%Qwen3.6 Plus
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)77.4%84.2%Qwen3.6 Plus
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)74.7%88.2%Qwen3.6 Plus
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)7.0%27.8%Qwen3.6 Plus
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)76.8%88.4%Qwen3.6 Plus
ARC-AGI30.7%Not measuredOnly o1 measured
SimpleBench40.1%Not measuredOnly o1 measured
Chess puzzles10.0%14.0%Qwen3.6 Plus
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured12.0%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
VPCT37.0%Not measuredOnly o1 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts13711448Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: expert13611454Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13721455Qwen3.6 Plus
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index05
Math benchmarks for o1 and Qwen3.6 Plus
Benchmarko1Qwen3.6 PlusLeader
AIME71.5%94.6%Qwen3.6 Plus
MATH 500 (Vals AI)90.4%Not measuredOnly o1 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)89.3%Not measuredOnly o1 measured
OTIS Mock AIME73.3%93.3%Qwen3.6 Plus
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 314.7%38.2%Qwen3.6 Plus
MATH level 594.7%Not measuredOnly o1 measured
LMArena Text: math13881449Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: mathematical work13901448Qwen3.6 Plus
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index08
Knowledge benchmarks for o1 and Qwen3.6 Plus
Benchmarko1Qwen3.6 PlusLeader
MMLU Pro83.5%87.7%Qwen3.6 Plus
LegalBench (Vals AI)80.4%84.2%Qwen3.6 Plus
CaseLaw (Vals AI)Not measured51.5%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured61.9%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)74.3%74.7%Qwen3.6 Plus
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured68.0%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
MedQA (Vals AI)96.5%Not measuredOnly o1 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)Not measured36.9%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)84.1%Not measuredOnly o1 measured
SimpleQA Verified41.1%44.1%Qwen3.6 Plus
GeoBench80.0%Not measuredOnly o1 measured
LMArena Text: science13691439Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13551442Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: legal and government13681437Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: business and finance13281430Qwen3.6 Plus
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for o1 and Qwen3.6 Plus
Benchmarko1Qwen3.6 PlusLeader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1243Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured1230Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1211Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1228Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured1202Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1236Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1161Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Design Arena: ASCII artNot measured1113Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index119
General benchmarks for o1 and Qwen3.6 Plus
Benchmarko1Qwen3.6 PlusLeader
SAGE (Vals AI)Not measured44.9%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured77.0%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Vals Multimodal IndexNot measured51.5%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
IFBench70.3%75.2%Qwen3.6 Plus
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)65.0%78.3%Qwen3.6 Plus
DTBench74.7%81.9%Qwen3.6 Plus
LMCA22.3%33.1%Qwen3.6 Plus
Fiction.LiveBench83.3%Not measuredOnly o1 measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)70.2%Not measuredOnly o1 measured
CL-benchNot measured20.3%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena Text13661436Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: instruction following13671424Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: creative writing13471404Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Vision1168Not measuredOnly o1 measured
LMArena Text: English13721445Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: non-English13581424Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: Chinese13941477Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: German13371451Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: Japanese13461390Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: Korean13961379o1
LMArena Text: French13441455Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: Spanish13451432Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: Russian13561434Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1433Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn13551438Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: longer queries13781439Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: writing and language13601418Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13581402Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Vision: English1162Not measuredOnly o1 measured
LMArena Vision: Chinese1235Not measuredOnly o1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for o1 and Qwen3.6 Plus
Benchmarko1Qwen3.6 PlusLeader
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

o1$0.045Fits in one request
Qwen3.6 Plus$0.0013Fits in one request

Qwen3.6 Plus costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

o1$0.930Fits in one request
Qwen3.6 Plus$0.022Fits in one request

Qwen3.6 Plus costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

o1$3.60Exceeds the context window
Qwen3.6 Plus$0.085Fits in one request

Qwen3.6 Plus 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 o1 and Qwen3.6 Plus
SpecificationOpenAI o1Qwen3.6 Plus
MakerOpenAIQwen
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedDecember 17, 2024April 2, 2026
Context window200K1M
Input $/Mtok$15.00$0.325
Output $/Mtok$60.00$1.95
Coding indexNot benchmarked44.1
Independent measurements behind it03
Cost per solved taskNot computable$1.19
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is o1 better than Qwen3.6 Plus for coding?

Only Qwen3.6 Plus has a coding score, 44.1 on the Vibe Coding Index; o1 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick o1 for work measured by LMArena Text: Korean, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, o1 or Qwen3.6 Plus?

o1 costs $15.00 per million input tokens and $60.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 Plus costs $0.325 and $1.95. Cost per solved task is known for Qwen3.6 Plus only.

Which has the bigger context window, o1 or Qwen3.6 Plus?

Qwen3.6 Plus, with 1M tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks is the o1 vs Qwen3.6 Plus comparison based on?

50 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. o1's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen3.6 Plus's on 3. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next