Qwen3.6 27B vs Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct
Compare Qwen3.6 27B and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, OCR, and Open Prompt.
Compare Qwen3.6 27B vs Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct live
Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.
Extract and compare text from images across multiple models.
Upload an image
Drag and drop an image here, or click to browse
Models in this comparison
Qwen3.6 27B vs Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct on Vision Evals
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct scores higher on 4 of the six Vision Evals tasks.
The widest gap is Identification, where Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct leads 90.6% to 78.1%.
Overall, Qwen3.6 27B averages 62.5% (#30 of 34) against 65.8% (#25 of 34) for Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct.
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct is cheaper ($0.0007 vs $0.0020 per sample), while Qwen3.6 27B is faster (8.9s vs 9.2s per sample).
Qwen3.6 27B vs Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct Comparison Table
Evals updated August 27, 2026Pricing updated August 30, 2026
| Property | Qwen3.6 27B | Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | Qwen | Qwen |
| Category | open | open |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Apr 2026 | Sep 2025 |
| Context Window | 262K | 256K |
| Parameters | 27B | 235B |
| License | Apache 2.0 | Apache 2.0 |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $0.600 | $0.210 |
| Output $/1M | $3.60 | $1.90 |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | Demo |
| Chart Question Answering | ||
| Classification | Demo | |
| Document Question Answering | ||
| Image Tagging | ||
| Multi-Label Classification | ||
| OCR | Demo | Demo |
| Vision Language | ||
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | Demo |
| Object Detection | Demo | |
| Video Classification | ||
| Model Features | ||
| Foundation Vision | ||
| LLMs with Vision Capabilities | ||
| Multimodal Vision | ||
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 6 vision tasks, pooled at low effort | ||
| Overall | 62.5% | 65.8% |
| Avg cost / sample | $0.0020 | $0.0007 |
| Avg speed / sample | 8.87s | 9.17s |
| By task | ||
| Object Detection | 53.9% $0.0039 | 52.1% $0.0014 |
| Counting | 44.6% $0.0007 | 47.3% $0.0002 |
| Identification | 78.1% $0.0006 | 90.6% $0.0002 |
| OCR | 82.8% $0.0023 | 88.1% $0.0010 |
| Data Extraction | 85.6% $0.0007 | 86.6% $0.0002 |
| Reasoning (low) | 29.8% $0.0007 | 29.8% $0.0002 |
| Reasoning (high) | 46.4% $0.016 | 33.8% $0.0002 |
Qwen3.6 27B vs Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct: Overview
Qwen3.6-27B is a dense 27-billion-parameter multimodal language model developed by Alibaba's Qwen team and released on April 22, 2026. It combines a causal language model with an integrated vision encoder, supporting text, image, and video inputs natively. The architecture employs a hybrid attention design that interleaves Gated DeltaNet linear attention blocks with standard Gated Attention layers across 64 transformer layers with a hidden dimension of 5,120. Unlike Mixture-of-Experts variants in the Qwen3.6 family, all 27 billion parameters are active on every inference pass, simplifying deployment and quantization. The model supports a native context window of 262,144 tokens, extensible to approximately 1,010,000 tokens via YaRN scaling. It is released under the Apache 2.0 license with open weights available on Hugging Face and ModelScope.
The model introduces two notable capabilities relative to prior Qwen releases: enhanced agentic coding support covering frontend workflows and repository-level reasoning, and a Thinking Preservation mechanism that retains chain-of-thought reasoning context across multi-turn conversation history to reduce redundant token generation in iterative agent sessions. It supports both a thinking mode for multi-step reasoning and a non-thinking mode for faster responses within a single model. On coding benchmarks, Qwen reports scores of 77.2 on SWE-bench Verified, 59.3 on Terminal-Bench 2.0, and 48.2 on SkillsBench. Vision capabilities include chart understanding (CharXiv RQ: 78.4), OCR (CC-OCR: 81.2), and video understanding (VideoMME with subtitles: 87.7).
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct is a flagship multimodal vision-language model developed by Qwen (Alibaba Cloud), designed for instruction-following tasks that combine advanced text generation with visual understanding. It serves as a high-end open-weight model for developers and researchers building multimodal AI systems that require strong reasoning, perception, and long-context capabilities.
The model supports interleaved text and image inputs, very long context windows (up to roughly 256K tokens), and efficient inference through a mixture-of-experts architecture with about 22B active parameters out of 235B total. In today’s landscape, it competes with top-tier proprietary vision-language models while offering the advantages of open weights and flexible deployment. Typical applications include multimodal assistants, document and image analysis, visual reasoning, and large-context instruction-based workflows.
Frequently Asked Questions
On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct performed better. It scores higher on 4 of the six vision tasks and averages 65.8% (#25 of 34) against 62.5% (#30 of 34) for Qwen3.6 27B. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.
No. On the Vision Evals Identification benchmark, Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct leads with 90.6% against 78.1%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0007 per sample against $0.0020. Qwen3.6 27B is priced at $0.60 per 1M input tokens and $3.60 per 1M output; Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct is priced at $0.21 per 1M input tokens and $1.90 per 1M output. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.
Qwen3.6 27B is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 8.9s per inference against 9.2s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.
Yes. The comparison demo on this page runs both models on the same image side by side for image captioning and OCR in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.