Navigate
AI BENCHY
Advertise here

Gemini 3.5 Flash (high) vs Qwen3.6 Flash

Gemini 3.5 Flash (high) leads on average score with 9.5 vs 6.1. Qwen3.6 Flash has the lower benchmark cost at $0.062 vs $1.976. Qwen3.6 Flash is faster at 3.74s vs 15.07s, with pass rates of 93.9% vs 34.9%.

Last updated at: 2026-07-25

Rank
#4
Total Output Tokens
201,677
Response Time (avg)
15.07s
Total Cost
$1.976
Rank
#135
Total Output Tokens
30,947
Response Time (avg)
3.74s
Total Cost
$0.062
Recommended model Gemini 3.5 Flash (high)

It has the strongest score in this comparison (9.5) and the best overall balance of cost and response time across all 2 models.

Detailed comparison

Metric Gemini 3.5 Flash Gemini 3.5 Flash high Release: 2026-05-19 Qwen3.6 Flash Qwen3.6 Flash none Release: 2026-04-20
Score 9.5 6.1
Rank #4 #135
Reliability 10.0 10.0
Consistency 9.3 9.6
Tests Correct
Attempt pass rate 93.9% 34.9%
Flaky tests 2 1
Total Runs 66 66
Cost per result 9.879 0.935
Total Cost $1.976 $0.062
Input Price $1.500 / 1M $0.188 / 1M
Output Price $9.000 / 1M $1.125 / 1M
Total Input Tokens 107,137 139,788
Output Tokens 8,777 30,947
Reasoning Tokens 192,900 0
Response Time (avg) 15.07s 3.74s
Response Time (max) 145.92s 48.79s
Response Time (total) 331.48s 82.38s

Hamster playing table tennis

Prompt: Create a detailed SVG illustration of a hamster playing table tennis.

#4 Gemini 3.5 Flash

high
Cost
$0.208
Time
118.2s
Tokens
23,158 tok

#135 Qwen3.6 Flash

none
Cost
$0.005
Time
20.1s
Tokens
4,211 tok

Top Models by Score

Score vs Total Cost

Response Time (avg)

Score vs Response Time (avg)

Total Output Tokens

Score vs Total Output Tokens

Category Breakdown

Coding Score Consistency Attempt pass rate Flaky tests Tests Correct Response Time (avg) Input Tokens Output Tokens Reasoning Tokens
Gemini 3.5 Flash 10.0 10.0 100.0% 0 22.96s 8,118 456 47,129
Qwen3.6 Flash 5.4 10.0 33.3% 0 1.79s 6,488 889 0

Quick Compare

Switch Comparison Pair