- Score
- 9.4 (+0.34 points)
- Total Cost (Current Price)
- $0.183 · 75.7% cheaper
- Response Time (avg)
- 6.24s · 20.4% faster
Summary
Gemini 3.5 Flash scores 9.0 on AI BENCHY and ranks #38. It has 10.0 reliability, a 85.5% pass rate, $0.752 total cost, and 7.85s average response time.
What makes Gemini 3.5 Flash unique: It stands out most in Trivia, where it ranks #1, while Coding is its weakest area at #15. It is notably fast compared with similar models.
Recommended alternatives
We recommend choosing one of these models instead:
- Score
- 9.6 (+0.53 points)
- Total Cost (Current Price)
- $0.460 · 38.9% cheaper
- Response Time (avg)
- 7.15s · 8.9% faster
Model facts
Researched on 2026-08-12
- Parameters
- ~500B total (~20B active)
- Architecture
- MoE
- Availability
- Closed
- License
- -
Best estimate from public evidence; the vendor did not disclose every value. Google does not disclose parameter counts.
9.0
Consistency
9.4
10.0
$0.752
Total Output Tokens
42,730
Total Input Tokens
244,533
Input Price
$1.500 / 1M
Output Price
$9.000 / 1M
Cache Read Price
$0.150 / 1M
Cache Write Price
$0.084 / 1M
Cache prices apply to input tokens. Reads reuse cached prompts; writes store them and can cost extra. Output tokens use the output price.
Flaky tests
2
Flaky tests had mixed outcomes across runs (at least one pass and one fail).
Hamster playing table tennis
Prompt: Create a detailed SVG illustration of a hamster playing table tennis.
#38 Gemini 3.5 Flash
low- Cost
- $0.068
- Time
- 39.1s
- Tokens
- 7,588 tok
Run history
| Tested on | Score | Reliability | Tests Correct | Total Cost | Compare |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-10-01 02:20 Re-test | 9.0 | 10.0 | $0.752 | Current run | |
| 2026-07-16 22:57 New test added | 8.9 | 10.0 | $0.433 | Compare | |
| 2026-06-04 14:02 New test added | 9.4 | 10.0 | $0.349 | Compare | |
| 2026-05-22 00:28 Suite changed | 9.3 | 10.0 | $0.285 | Compare | |
| 2026-05-19 23:35 Initial run | 9.6 | 10.0 | $0.245 | Compare |
This run used a different benchmark suite. Keep suite changes in mind when reading historical movement.
Run comparison
| Run | Benchmark coverage | Score | Consistency | Reliability | Tests Correct | Flaky tests | Total Output Tokens | Total Input Tokens | Total Cost | Response Time (avg) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-10-01 02:20 · Current run | 69/69 attempts | 9.0 | 9.4 | 10.0 | 19/23 | 2 | 42,730 | 244,533 | $0.752 | 7.85s |
| 2026-07-16 22:57 · New test added | 66/66 attempts | 8.9 | 9.7 | 10.0 | 19/22 | 1 | 33,421 | 87,817 | $0.433 | 5.55s |
| Difference | — | +0.1 | -0.3 | 0.0 | 0 | +1 | +9309 | +156716 | +$0.319 | +2291ms |
Benchmark coverage differs: 69/69 attempts (Target: 3 repeats per test) versus 66/66 attempts (Target: 3 repeats per test). Totals and repeat-sensitive metrics are not directly comparable.
These two runs used different benchmark suites, so the deltas reflect both model changes and suite changes.
Price History
Historical pricing data for this model from OpenRouter.
| Date | Input Price | Output Price | Cache Read Price | Cache Write Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-08-14 12:51 | $1.500 / 1M | $9.000 / 1M | N/A | N/A |
| 2026-10-01 18:33 | $1.500 / 1M | $9.000 / 1M | $0.150 / 1M | $0.084 / 1M |
Charts
Choose the first model, then click a second model to open a side-by-side page.
Top Models by Score
Score vs Total Cost
Response Time (avg)
Score vs Response Time (avg)
Total Output Tokens
Score vs Total Output Tokens
Quick Compare
Category Breakdown
| Category | Score | Consistency | Tests Correct |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | 10.0 | 10.0 | |
| Anti-AI Tricks | 10.0 | 10.0 | |
| Coding | 7.8 | 10.0 | |
| Combined | 8.2 | 6.9 | |
| Data parsing and extraction | 10.0 | 10.0 | |
| Domain specific | 5.3 | 7.2 | |
| General Intelligence | 10.0 | 10.0 | |
| Instructions following | 9.9 | 10.0 | |
| Puzzle Solving | 10.0 | 10.0 | |
| Tool Calling | 10.0 | 10.0 | |
| Trivia | 10.0 | 10.0 |