Navigate
AI BENCHY
Advertise here

Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash vs Qwen: Qwen3.5-27B

Gemini 3.5 Flash (minimal) leads on average score with 6.8 vs 6.5. Qwen3.5-27B has the lower benchmark cost at $0.090 vs $0.300. Gemini 3.5 Flash (minimal) is faster at 2.65s vs 4.76s, with pass rates of 65.2% vs 40.9%.

Recommended modelGemini 3.5 Flash (minimal)It has the best score here (6.8), while responding about 1.8x faster than Qwen3.5-27B.

Last updated at: 2026-07-18

Metric Gemini 3.5 Flash Gemini 3.5 Flash minimal Release: 2026-05-19 Qwen3.5-27B Qwen3.5-27B none Release: 2026-02-24
Score 6.8 6.5
Rank #87 #100
Reliability 10.0 10.0
Consistency 9.6 9.3
Tests Correct
Attempt pass rate 65.2% 40.9%
Flaky tests 1 2
Total Runs 66 66
Cost per result 2.138 0.763
Total Cost $0.300 $0.090
Input Price $1.500 / 1M $0.260 / 1M
Output Price $9.000 / 1M $2.600 / 1M
Total Input Tokens 100,753 102,316
Output Tokens 16,454 24,321
Reasoning Tokens 0 0
Response Time (avg) 2.65s 4.76s
Response Time (max) 25.26s 69.46s
Response Time (total) 58.27s 104.71s

Hamster playing table tennis

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

#87 Gemini 3.5 Flash

minimal
Cost
$0.041
Time
20.4s
Tokens
4,608 tok

#100 Qwen3.5-27B

none
Cost
$0.007
Time
42.9s
Tokens
4,273 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 5.6 9.9 33.3% 0 2.75s 8,122 3,456 0
Qwen3.5-27B 5.8 10.0 33.3% 0 1.80s 7,913 415 0

Quick Compare

Switch Comparison Pair