Navigasi
AI BENCHY
AD
Track all your projects in one dashboard. Get 📊stats, 🔥heatmaps and 👀recordings in one self-hosted dashboard.
uxwizz.com

Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite vs Qwen: Qwen3.6 Plus

Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite (high) unggul dalam skor rata-rata dengan 8.1 vs 7.8. Qwen3.6 Plus (medium) memiliki biaya benchmark lebih rendah di $0.405 vs $0.584. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite (high) lebih cepat di 9.48s vs 43.12s, dengan tingkat keberhasilan 81.8% vs 71.2%.

Model yang direkomendasikanGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite (high)It has the best score here (8.1), while responding about 4.5x faster than Qwen3.6 Plus (medium).

Benchmark dihasilkan dari suite pengujian AI BENCHY pada: 2026-07-21

Metrik Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite high Rilis: 2026-07-21 Qwen3.6 Plus Qwen3.6 Plus medium Rilis: 2026-04-20
Skor 8.1 7.8
Peringkat #31 #41
Keandalan 10.0 10.0
Konsistensi 7.5 9.3
Tes benar
Tingkat lulus per percobaan 81.8% 71.2%
Tes tidak stabil 7 2
Total Run 66 66
Biaya per hasil 4.169 1.514
Total Biaya $0.584 $0.405
Harga input $0.300 / 1M $0.325 / 1M
Harga output $2.500 / 1M $1.950 / 1M
Total token input 105,138 97,689
Token output 8,315 6,412
Token penalaran 212,507 184,825
Waktu respons (rata-rata) 9.48s 43.12s
Waktu respons (maks) 43.93s 291.55s
Waktu respons (total) 208.52s 905.53s

Hamster playing table tennis

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

#31 Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite

high
Biaya
$0.023
Waktu
23.6s
Token
9,128 tok

#41 Qwen3.6 Plus

medium
Biaya
$0.024
Waktu
219.0s
Token
12,235 tok

Model teratas berdasarkan skor

Skor vs Total Biaya

Waktu respons (rata-rata)

Skor vs Waktu respons (rata-rata)

Total token output

Skor vs Total token output

Rincian Kategori

Pemrograman Skor Konsistensi Tingkat lulus per percobaan Tes tidak stabil Tes benar Waktu respons (rata-rata) Token input Token output Token penalaran
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite 8.6 7.6 88.9% 1 15.09s 8,136 452 55,603
Qwen3.6 Plus 6.1 7.8 44.4% 1 153.12s 7,098 58 50,586

Perbandingan Cepat

Ganti Pasangan Perbandingan