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 35B A3B

Skor rata-rata hampir imbang di 6.7 vs 6.7. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite (low) memiliki biaya benchmark lebih rendah di $0.145 vs $0.746. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite (low) lebih cepat di 2.25s vs 58.06s, dengan tingkat keberhasilan 66.7% vs 60.6%.

Model yang direkomendasikanGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite (low)It has the best score here (6.7), while costing about 5.2x less than Qwen3.6 35B A3B (medium).

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

Metrik Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite low Rilis: 2026-07-21 Qwen3.6 35B A3B Qwen3.6 35B A3B medium Rilis: 2026-04-20
Skor 6.7 6.7
Peringkat #95 #94
Keandalan 10.0 10.0
Konsistensi 8.2 9.6
Tes benar
Tingkat lulus per percobaan 66.7% 60.6%
Tes tidak stabil 5 1
Total Run 66 66
Biaya per hasil 1.201 5.712
Total Biaya $0.145 $0.746
Harga input $0.300 / 1M $0.140 / 1M
Harga output $2.500 / 1M $1.000 / 1M
Total token input 144,622 85,139
Token output 15,302 61,819
Token penalaran 24,971 678,766
Waktu respons (rata-rata) 2.25s 58.06s
Waktu respons (maks) 13.50s 817.57s
Waktu respons (total) 49.58s 1161.18s

Hamster playing table tennis

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

#95 Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite

low
Biaya
$0.008
Waktu
7.7s
Token
3,056 tok

#94 Qwen3.6 35B A3B

medium
SVG tidak valid
Biaya
$0.000
Waktu
300.0s
Token
0 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 4.1 7.9 11.1% 1 672ms 8,136 463 0
Qwen3.6 35B A3B 7.7 10.0 66.7% 0 50.55s 5,051 7,929 37,223

Perbandingan Cepat

Ganti Pasangan Perbandingan