Qwen3.6 27B vs Qwen3 Coder Next
Qwen3.6 27B leads Qwen3 Coder Next on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 21.4 to 9.2, and Qwen3 Coder Next costs 3.4x less per output token ($0.80 vs $2.70 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 10 benchmarks have a result for both.
Qwen3.6 27B or Qwen3 Coder Next: which to pick
Only Qwen3.6 27B has a coding score, 36.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3 Coder Next has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Qwen3 Coder Next for output tokens 3.4x cheaper ($0.80 vs $2.70 per million).
- Shared results
- 10
- Qwen3.6 27B only
- 14
- Qwen3 Coder Next only
- 1
- Like-for-like categories
- 5 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
Qwen3.6 27B
Qwen3.6 27B leads, 21.4 against 9.2.
Same board, both measured
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
Qwen3.6 27B
Qwen3.6 27B leads, 18.5 against 0.9.
Same board, both measured
Long documents
Listed context window
No call
Both take 262K tokens.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen3 Coder Next
Qwen3.6 27B $0.0018, Qwen3 Coder Next $0.0005 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
- Qwen3.6 27B 36.8 from 2 benchmarks, Qwen3 Coder Next not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- General, 31.3 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- IFBench: Qwen3.6 27B 67.6% against Qwen3 Coder Next 35.2%, 32.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Qwen3.6 27B $2.70 against Qwen3 Coder Next $0.80 per million output tokens, 3.4x apart.
- Context window
- Both take 262K tokens.
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 | Qwen3.6 27B | Bars | Qwen3 Coder Next | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 3 | 0 | ||
| Intelligence | 1 | 0 | ||
| Agentic work | 2 | 0 | ||
| Reasoning | 2 | 0 | ||
| General | 2 | 0 | ||
| All shared boards | 10 | 0 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index30
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 27B | Qwen3 Coder Next | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Coding Index | 53.7 | 36.2 | Qwen3.6 27B |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | 70.0% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | 11.9% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| SciCode | 42.8% | 36.2% | Qwen3.6 27B |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 34.8% | 18.2% | Qwen3.6 27B |
| WeirdML | Not measured | 34.4% | Only Qwen3 Coder Next measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 32 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 27B | Qwen3 Coder Next | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 21.4 | 9.2 | Qwen3.6 27B |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 146.2 | Not measured | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 27B | Qwen3 Coder Next | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | 18.5 | 0.9 | Qwen3.6 27B |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 94.2% | 79.5% | Qwen3.6 27B |
| Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 27B | Qwen3 Coder Next | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 84.2% | 73.7% | Qwen3.6 27B |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 23.1% | 10.1% | Qwen3.6 27B |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 85.9% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| Mystery game puzzles | 7.0% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 27B | Qwen3 Coder Next | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME | 91.1% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | 35.1% | Not measured | 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 index4 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 27B | Qwen3 Coder Next | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| CaseLaw (Vals AI) | 53.2% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | 62.3% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | 71.3% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| MortgageTax (Vals AI) | 68.3% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.6 27B 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
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 27B | Qwen3 Coder Next | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 9 boards here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 27B | Qwen3 Coder Next | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| SAGE (Vals AI) | 45.6% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| IFBench | 67.6% | 35.2% | Qwen3.6 27B |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 77.3% | 47.0% | Qwen3.6 27B |
| DTBench | 78.1% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| LMCA | 34.5% | Not measured | 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 | Qwen3.6 27B | Qwen3 Coder Next | 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
Qwen3 Coder Next costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Qwen3 Coder Next costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Qwen3 Coder Next 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 | Qwen3.6 27B | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Qwen | Qwen |
| Weights | Open weights | Open weights |
| Released | April 27, 2026 | February 4, 2026 |
| Context window | 262K | 262K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.45 | $0.12 |
| Output $/Mtok | $2.70 | $0.80 |
| Coding index | 36.8 | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 2 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | $1.30 | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Qwen3.6 27B better than Qwen3 Coder Next for coding?
Only Qwen3.6 27B has a coding score, 36.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3 Coder Next has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Qwen3 Coder Next for output tokens 3.4x cheaper ($0.80 vs $2.70 per million).
Which is cheaper, Qwen3.6 27B or Qwen3 Coder Next?
Qwen3.6 27B costs $0.45 per million input tokens and $2.70 per million output tokens; Qwen3 Coder Next costs $0.12 and $0.80. Cost per solved task is known for Qwen3.6 27B only.
Which has the bigger context window, Qwen3.6 27B or Qwen3 Coder Next?
Neither: both take 262K tokens.
How many benchmarks is the Qwen3.6 27B vs Qwen3 Coder Next comparison based on?
10 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Qwen3.6 27B's coding index rests on 2 independent benchmarks and Qwen3 Coder Next's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.