Qwen3.6 35B A3B vs Step 3.7 Flash
Step 3.7 Flash leads Qwen3.6 35B A3B on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 19.5 to 18.2, at about the same output price ($1.15 vs $1.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 9 benchmarks have a result for both.
Qwen3.6 35B A3B or Step 3.7 Flash: which to pick
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Qwen3.6 35B A3B for output tokens 1.1x cheaper ($1.00 vs $1.15 per million) and work measured by SciCode or Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.
- Shared results
- 9
- Qwen3.6 35B A3B only
- 11
- Step 3.7 Flash only
- 9
- 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
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Step 3.7 Flash
Step 3.7 Flash leads, 19.5 against 18.2.
Same board, both measured
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
No call
Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B has a AA Agentic Index result, 13.1.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
No call
Only Step 3.7 Flash has a Design Arena: websites result, 1196.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
No call
Both take 262K tokens.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen3.6 35B A3B
Qwen3.6 35B A3B $0.0006, Step 3.7 Flash $0.0008 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Qwen3.6 35B A3B not benchmarked, Step 3.7 Flash not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- Coding, 3.5 points apart on average over 3 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- SciCode: Qwen3.6 35B A3B 36.6% against Step 3.7 Flash 43.9%, 7.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Qwen3.6 35B A3B $1.00 against Step 3.7 Flash $1.15 per million output tokens, 1.1x 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 35B A3B | Bars | Step 3.7 Flash | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 1 | 2 | ||
| Intelligence | 0 | 1 | ||
| Agentic work | 0 | 1 | ||
| Reasoning | 2 | 0 | ||
| General | 0 | 2 | ||
| All shared boards | 3 | 6 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index12
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 35B A3B | Step 3.7 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Coding Index | 41.9 | 39.6 | Qwen3.6 35B A3B |
| SciCode | 36.6% | 43.9% | Step 3.7 Flash |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 34.8% | 35.6% | Step 3.7 Flash |
| Terminal-Bench | 24.6% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B measured |
| WeirdML | 34.5% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B measured |
| ALE-Bench | Not measured | 694.1 | Only Step 3.7 Flash measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 33 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 35B A3B | Step 3.7 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 18.2 | 19.5 | Step 3.7 Flash |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 143.7 | Not measured | Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B measured |
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 35B A3B | Step 3.7 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | 13.1 | Not measured | Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 95.3% | 98.5% | Step 3.7 Flash |
| Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 35B A3B | Step 3.7 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 84.1% | 80.9% | Qwen3.6 35B A3B |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 22.2% | 21.4% | Qwen3.6 35B A3B |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 84.8% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B measured |
| Mystery game puzzles | 22.0% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B 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 | Qwen3.6 35B A3B | Step 3.7 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME | 86.7% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B measured |
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | 20.4% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here | |||
KnowledgeNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 35B A3B | Step 3.7 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 18 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 35B A3B | Step 3.7 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | Not measured | 1196 | Only Step 3.7 Flash measured |
| Design Arena: UI components | Not measured | 1177 | Only Step 3.7 Flash measured |
| Design Arena: game dev | Not measured | 1158 | Only Step 3.7 Flash measured |
| Design Arena: data viz | Not measured | 1173 | Only Step 3.7 Flash measured |
| Design Arena: 3D | Not measured | 1129 | Only Step 3.7 Flash measured |
| Design Arena: all code categories | Not measured | 1182 | Only Step 3.7 Flash measured |
| Design Arena: SVG | Not measured | 1084 | Only Step 3.7 Flash measured |
| Design Arena: ASCII art | Not measured | 1152 | Only Step 3.7 Flash measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 35B A3B | Step 3.7 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBench | 64.4% | 67.3% | Step 3.7 Flash |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 71.7% | 73.7% | Step 3.7 Flash |
| DTBench | 73.9% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B measured |
| LMCA | 29.7% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B measured |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 44.4% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B 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 35B A3B | Step 3.7 Flash | 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
Qwen3.6 35B A3B costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Qwen3.6 35B A3B costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
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.
| Specification | Qwen3.6 35B A3B | StepFun Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Qwen | StepFun |
| Weights | Open weights | Open weights |
| Released | April 27, 2026 | May 28, 2026 |
| Context window | 262K | 262K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.10 | $0.20 |
| Output $/Mtok | $1.00 | $1.15 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Qwen3.6 35B A3B better than Step 3.7 Flash for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Qwen3.6 35B A3B for output tokens 1.1x cheaper ($1.00 vs $1.15 per million) and work measured by SciCode or Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.
Which is cheaper, Qwen3.6 35B A3B or Step 3.7 Flash?
Qwen3.6 35B A3B costs $0.10 per million input tokens and $1.00 per million output tokens; Step 3.7 Flash costs $0.20 and $1.15. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Qwen3.6 35B A3B or Step 3.7 Flash?
Neither: both take 262K tokens.
How many benchmarks is the Qwen3.6 35B A3B vs Step 3.7 Flash comparison based on?
9 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Qwen3.6 35B A3B's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Step 3.7 Flash's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.