Qwen3.6 27B vs Solar Pro 3
Qwen3.6 27B leads Solar Pro 3 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 21.4 to 7.8, and Solar Pro 3 costs 4.5x less per output token ($0.60 vs $2.70 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 10 benchmarks have a result for both.
Qwen3.6 27B or Solar Pro 3: which to pick
Only Qwen3.6 27B has a coding score, 36.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; Solar Pro 3 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Solar Pro 3 for output tokens 4.5x cheaper ($0.60 vs $2.70 per million) and work measured by IFBench, where it leads.
- Shared results
- 10
- Qwen3.6 27B only
- 15
- Solar Pro 3 only
- 0
- 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 7.8.
Same board, both measured
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
Qwen3.6 27B
Qwen3.6 27B leads, 18.5 against 1.4.
Same board, both measured
Long documents
Listed context window
Qwen3.6 27B
Qwen3.6 27B takes 262K tokens against 131K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Solar Pro 3
Qwen3.6 27B $0.0018, Solar Pro 3 $0.0004 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, Solar Pro 3 not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- Coding, 27.4 points apart on average over 3 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- Long context reasoning (AA-LCR): Qwen3.6 27B 77.3% against Solar Pro 3 32.3%, 45.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Qwen3.6 27B $2.70 against Solar Pro 3 $0.60 per million output tokens, 4.5x apart.
- Context window
- Qwen3.6 27B takes 262K tokens, Solar Pro 3 131K.
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 | Solar Pro 3 | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 3 | 0 | ||
| Intelligence | 1 | 0 | ||
| Agentic work | 2 | 0 | ||
| Reasoning | 2 | 0 | ||
| General | 1 | 1 | ||
| All shared boards | 9 | 1 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index30
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 27B | Solar Pro 3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Coding Index | 53.7 | 16.2 | 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% | 25.5% | Qwen3.6 27B |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 34.8% | 7.6% | Qwen3.6 27B |
| Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 27B | Solar Pro 3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 21.4 | 7.8 | 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 | Solar Pro 3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | 18.5 | 1.4 | Qwen3.6 27B |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 94.2% | 86.3% | Qwen3.6 27B |
| Neither model has a result on the other 40 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 27B | Solar Pro 3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 84.2% | 72.4% | Qwen3.6 27B |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 23.1% | 10.3% | 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 19 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 27B | Solar Pro 3 | 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 12 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 27B | Solar Pro 3 | 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 16 boards here | |||
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 27B | Solar Pro 3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 9 boards here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 27B | Solar Pro 3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| SAGE (Vals AI) | 45.6% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| IFBench | 67.6% | 71.2% | Solar Pro 3 |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 77.3% | 32.3% | Qwen3.6 27B |
| DTBench | 78.1% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| LMCA | 34.5% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1026 | Not measured | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 42 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 27B | Solar Pro 3 | 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
Solar Pro 3 costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Solar Pro 3 costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Solar Pro 3 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 | Upstage Solar Pro 3 |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Qwen | Upstage |
| Weights | Open weights | No public weights listed |
| Released | April 27, 2026 | January 27, 2026 |
| Context window | 262K | 131K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.45 | $0.15 |
| Output $/Mtok | $2.70 | $0.60 |
| 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 Solar Pro 3 for coding?
Only Qwen3.6 27B has a coding score, 36.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; Solar Pro 3 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Solar Pro 3 for output tokens 4.5x cheaper ($0.60 vs $2.70 per million) and work measured by IFBench, where it leads.
Which is cheaper, Qwen3.6 27B or Solar Pro 3?
Qwen3.6 27B costs $0.45 per million input tokens and $2.70 per million output tokens; Solar Pro 3 costs $0.15 and $0.60. Cost per solved task is known for Qwen3.6 27B only.
Which has the bigger context window, Qwen3.6 27B or Solar Pro 3?
Qwen3.6 27B, with 262K tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks is the Qwen3.6 27B vs Solar Pro 3 comparison based on?
10 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Qwen3.6 27B's coding index rests on 2 independent benchmarks and Solar Pro 3's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.