Qwen3.6 27B (Reasoning) vs Qwen3.7 Max
Which is better for the money: Qwen3.6 27B (Reasoning) by Alibaba or Qwen3.7 Max by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Qwen3.7 Max scores 8.1 points higher (29.5 vs 21.4) but costs 2.0× as much to run the benchmark ($2277 vs $1145; flagship vs premium cost classes). Pick Qwen3.7 Max when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Qwen3.6 27B (Reasoning).
| Metric | Qwen3.6 27B (Reasoning) | Qwen3.7 Max | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 21.4 | 29.5 | +37.9% Qwen3.7 Max is 37.9% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $1,145.36 | $2,277.12 | +98.8% Qwen3.7 Max is 98.8% more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 111.39s | 16.64s | −85.1% Qwen3.7 Max is 85.1% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.60 / $3.60 | $2.50 / $7.50 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Video | Text |
Qwen3.7 Max vs Qwen3.6 27B (Reasoning): 37.9% more intelligence, 98.8% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 85.1% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Qwen3.6 27B (Reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
- Qwen3.7 Max is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) scores 53.60 for $2172.
Qwen3.6 27B (Reasoning)Qwen3.7 MaxToday's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/qwen3-6-27b/qwen3-7-max · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/qwen3-6-27b/qwen3-7-max?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill