Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

o4 Mini vs Qwen3.6 35B A3B

Qwen3.6 35B A3B leads o4 Mini on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 18.2 to 16.7, and Qwen3.6 35B A3B costs 4.4x less per output token ($1.00 vs $4.40 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 15 benchmarks have a result for both.

o4 MiniOpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
43.0
Output $/M
$4.40
5
Qwen3.6 35B A3BQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
45.0
Output $/M
$1.00
10
vs boards won of 15 shared

o4 Mini or Qwen3.6 35B A3B: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick o4 Mini for work measured by Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) or AA Intelligence Index, where it leads.

Shared results
15
o4 Mini only
83
Qwen3.6 35B A3B only
5
Like-for-like categories
6 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
o4 Mini not benchmarked, Qwen3.6 35B A3B not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 39.8 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: o4 Mini 55.6% against Qwen3.6 35B A3B 95.3%, 39.8 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
o4 Mini $4.40 against Qwen3.6 35B A3B $1.00 per million output tokens, 4.4x apart.
Context window
o4 Mini takes 200K tokens, Qwen3.6 35B A3B 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
Categoryo4 MiniBarsQwen3.6 35B A3BTies
Coding11
Intelligence11
Agentic work01
Reasoning04
Math11
General22
All shared boards510
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index11
Coding benchmarks for o4 Mini and Qwen3.6 35B A3B
Benchmarko4 MiniQwen3.6 35B A3BLeader
Aider polyglot72.0%Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
SWE-bench Verified64.6%Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
SWE-bench Multimodal33.9%Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
AA Coding IndexNot measured41.9Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)82.2%Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)85.9%Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
SciCodeNot measured36.6%Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)15.2%34.8%Qwen3.6 35B A3B
Terminal-BenchNot measured24.6%Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B measured
GSO-Bench3.6%Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
WeirdML52.6%34.5%o4 Mini
LMArena Text: coding1368Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1367Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
SciCode10.8%Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
Neither model has a result on the other 25 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11
Intelligence benchmarks for o4 Mini and Qwen3.6 35B A3B
Benchmarko4 MiniQwen3.6 35B A3BLeader
AA Intelligence Index16.718.2Qwen3.6 35B A3B
Epoch Capabilities Index145.5143.7o4 Mini
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for o4 Mini and Qwen3.6 35B A3B
Benchmarko4 MiniQwen3.6 35B A3BLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured13.1Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B measured
τ²-Bench Telecom55.6%95.3%Qwen3.6 35B A3B
METR time horizons63.9%Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)53.2%Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Reasoning benchmarks for o4 Mini and Qwen3.6 35B A3B
Benchmarko4 MiniQwen3.6 35B A3BLeader
GPQA Diamond74.5%Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)79.7%Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)78.4%84.1%Qwen3.6 35B A3B
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)16.5%22.2%Qwen3.6 35B A3B
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)79.6%84.8%Qwen3.6 35B A3B
ARC-AGI58.7%Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
ARC-AGI-26.1%Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
SimpleBench38.7%Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
Chess puzzles22.0%Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
Mystery game puzzles5.0%22.0%Qwen3.6 35B A3B
VPCT57.5%Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1351Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: expert1343Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1366Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
LMArena Vision: diagrams1197Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
LMArena Vision: homework1234Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark67.6%Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11
Math benchmarks for o4 Mini and Qwen3.6 35B A3B
Benchmarko4 MiniQwen3.6 35B A3BLeader
AIME83.7%Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)94.2%Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
MGSM (Vals AI)93.4%Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
AA Math Index90.7Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)90.7%Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
OTIS Mock AIME81.7%86.7%Qwen3.6 35B A3B
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 336.1%20.4%o4 Mini
FrontierMath, tier 44.9%Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
MATH level 597.8%Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: math1389Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1379Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index15 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for o4 Mini and Qwen3.6 35B A3B
Benchmarko4 MiniQwen3.6 35B A3BLeader
MMLU Pro80.6%Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)79.2%Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)59.0%Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)74.8%Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)64.8%Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
MedQA (Vals AI)96.0%Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
MedCode (Vals AI)33.8%Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)83.2%Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
SimpleQA Verified19.6%Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
GeoBench64.0%Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: science1354Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1361Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1350Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1325Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
FACTS Benchmark Suite28.1%Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for o4 Mini and Qwen3.6 35B A3B
Benchmarko4 MiniQwen3.6 35B A3BLeader
Design Arena: websites985Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
Design Arena: UI components983Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
Design Arena: game dev1003Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
Design Arena: data viz990Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
Design Arena: 3D854Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
Design Arena: all code categories976Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index22
General benchmarks for o4 Mini and Qwen3.6 35B A3B
Benchmarko4 MiniQwen3.6 35B A3BLeader
SAGE (Vals AI)41.1%Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)69.1%Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
IFBench68.7%64.4%o4 Mini
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)61.0%71.7%Qwen3.6 35B A3B
DTBench77.6%73.9%o4 Mini
LMCA26.5%29.7%Qwen3.6 35B A3B
Fiction.LiveBench77.8%Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)75.0%Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
Surface Evolver BenchNot measured44.4%Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B measured
LMArena Text1353Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1320Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1294Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
LMArena Vision1194Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: English1367Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: non-English1337Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1354Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: German1336Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1308Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: Korean1312Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: French1364Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1346Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: Russian1334Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: Polish1358Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1350Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1315Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1316Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1308Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
LMArena Vision: English1200Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
LMArena Vision: Chinese1218Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
LMArena Vision: reading text1197Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
LMArena Vision: humor1199Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
LMArena Vision: captioning1204Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing things1218Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing1166Not measuredOnly o4 Mini measured
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for o4 Mini and Qwen3.6 35B A3B
Benchmarko4 MiniQwen3.6 35B A3BLeader
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

o4 Mini$0.0033Fits in one request
Qwen3.6 35B A3B$0.0006Fits in one request

Qwen3.6 35B A3B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

o4 Mini$0.068Fits in one request
Qwen3.6 35B A3B$0.0080Fits in one request

Qwen3.6 35B A3B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

o4 Mini$0.264Exceeds the context window
Qwen3.6 35B A3B$0.030Fits in one request

Qwen3.6 35B A3B 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 o4 Mini and Qwen3.6 35B A3B
SpecificationOpenAI o4 MiniQwen3.6 35B A3B
MakerOpenAIQwen
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedApril 16, 2025April 27, 2026
Context window200K262K
Input $/Mtok$1.10$0.10
Output $/Mtok$4.40$1.00
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is o4 Mini better than Qwen3.6 35B A3B for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick o4 Mini for work measured by Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) or AA Intelligence Index, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, o4 Mini or Qwen3.6 35B A3B?

o4 Mini costs $1.10 per million input tokens and $4.40 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 35B A3B costs $0.10 and $1.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, o4 Mini or Qwen3.6 35B A3B?

Qwen3.6 35B A3B, with 262K tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks is the o4 Mini vs Qwen3.6 35B A3B comparison based on?

15 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. o4 Mini's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen3.6 35B A3B's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next