Navigasi
AI BENCHY
Advertise here

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

Skor rata-rata hampir imbang di 6.5 vs 6.5. Qwen3.5-27B memiliki biaya benchmark lebih rendah di $0.090 vs $0.369. Qwen3.5-27B lebih cepat di 4.76s vs 6.01s, dengan tingkat keberhasilan 69.7% vs 40.9%.

Model yang direkomendasikanQwen3.5-27BIt has the best score here (6.5), while costing about 4.1x less than Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite (medium).

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

Metrik Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite medium Rilis: 2026-07-21 Qwen3.5-27B Qwen3.5-27B none Rilis: 2026-02-24
Skor 6.5 6.5
Peringkat #104 #109
Keandalan 10.0 10.0
Konsistensi 7.4 9.3
Tes benar
Tingkat lulus per percobaan 69.7% 40.9%
Tes tidak stabil 7 2
Total Run 66 66
Biaya per hasil 3.074 0.763
Total Biaya $0.369 $0.090
Harga input $0.300 / 1M $0.260 / 1M
Harga output $2.500 / 1M $2.600 / 1M
Total token input 118,818 102,316
Token output 11,677 24,321
Token penalaran 121,611 0
Waktu respons (rata-rata) 6.01s 4.76s
Waktu respons (maks) 49.03s 69.46s
Waktu respons (total) 132.30s 104.71s

Hamster playing table tennis

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

#104 Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite

medium
Biaya
$0.015
Waktu
16.4s
Token
5,971 tok

#109 Qwen3.5-27B

none
Biaya
$0.007
Waktu
42.9s
Token
4,273 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 5.5 7.4 44.4% 1 8.37s 8,136 452 25,999
Qwen3.5-27B 5.8 10.0 33.3% 0 1.80s 7,913 415 0

Perbandingan Cepat

Ganti Pasangan Perbandingan