Navigate
AI BENCHY
Advertise here

Gemini 3.5 Flash vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B (medium)

Qwen3.5-122B-A10B (medium) leads on average score with 7.1 vs 7.0. Qwen3.5-122B-A10B (medium) has the lower benchmark cost at $1.046 vs $1.079. Gemini 3.5 Flash is faster at 9.93s vs 64.16s, with pass rates of 74.2% vs 71.2%.

Last updated at: 2026-07-28

Rank
#89
Total Output Tokens
117,518
Response Time (avg)
9.93s
Total Cost
$1.079
Rank
#82
Total Output Tokens
487,218
Response Time (avg)
64.16s
Total Cost
$1.046
Recommended model Gemini 3.5 Flash

Its score stays close to the best score here (7.0 vs 7.1), while responding about 6.5x faster than Qwen3.5-122B-A10B (medium).

Detailed comparison

Metric Gemini 3.5 Flash Gemini 3.5 Flash none Release: 2026-05-19 Qwen3.5-122B-A10B Qwen3.5-122B-A10B medium Release: 2026-02-24
Score 7.0 7.1
Rank #89 #82
Reliability 10.0 10.0
Consistency 8.9 8.5
Tests Correct
Attempt pass rate 74.2% 71.2%
Flaky tests 3 4
Total Runs 66 66
Cost per result 7.190 8.509
Total Cost $1.079 $1.046
Input Price $1.500 / 1M $0.260 / 1M
Output Price $9.000 / 1M $2.080 / 1M
Total Input Tokens 13,843 124,771
Output Tokens 117,518 44,077
Reasoning Tokens 0 443,141
Response Time (avg) 9.93s 64.16s
Response Time (max) 64.36s 519.30s
Response Time (total) 178.68s 1411.60s

Model generation showcase

Hamster playing table tennis

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

#89 Gemini 3.5 Flash

none
Cost
$0.225
Time
125.5s
Tokens
25,004 tok

#82 Qwen3.5-122B-A10B

medium
Cost
$0.019
Time
48.7s
Tokens
6,034 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 8.8 7.8 88.9% 1 34.69s 8,122 75,927 0
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B 6.0 7.2 55.6% 1 114.48s 7,630 8,057 82,578

Quick Compare

Switch Comparison Pair