AI BENCHY
Advertise here
#5

Gemini 3.5 Flash

Google Release: 2026-05-19 Tested on: 2026-05-19 23:35 google/gemini-3.5-flash::medium
~500B total (~20B active)MoEClosedEstimated
(high) (medium) (low) (minimal) (none)

Summary

Gemini 3.5 Flash scores 9.2 on AI BENCHY and ranks #5. It has 10.0 reliability, a 89.5% pass rate, $0.393 total cost, and 3.90s average response time.

What makes Gemini 3.5 Flash unique: It stands out most in Domain specific, where it ranks #3, while Puzzle Solving is its weakest area at #14. It is one of the highest-ranked models overall. It is notably fast compared with similar models.

Model facts

Researched on 2026-08-12

Estimated
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.

Parameter source Availability source

Score

9.2

Consistency

10.0

Reliability

10.0

Total Cost (Current Price)

$0.393

Total Output Tokens

38,630

Total Input Tokens

0

Input Price

$1.500 / 1M

Output Price

$9.000 / 1M

Tests Correct

Wrong Tests: 2

Attempt pass rate: 89.5%

Flaky tests

0

Flaky tests had mixed outcomes across runs (at least one pass and one fail).

Response Time (avg)

3.90s

Response Time (max): 12.05s

Response Time (total): 74.13s

Wrong answer: 2

Hamster playing table tennis

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

#5 Gemini 3.5 Flash

medium
Cost
$0.201
Time
112.9s
Tokens
22,371 tok

Run history

Tested on Score Reliability Tests Correct Total Cost Compare
2026-08-14 02:47 Re-test 9.0 10.0 $0.665 Compare
2026-07-16 23:01 New test added 9.1 10.0 $0.642 Compare
2026-06-04 14:03 New test added 9.0 10.0 $0.582 Compare
2026-05-22 00:29 Re-test 9.0 10.0 $0.472 Compare
2026-05-19 23:35 Initial run 9.2 10.0 $0.393 Current run

Run comparison

RunBenchmark coverageScoreConsistencyReliabilityTests CorrectFlaky testsTotal Output TokensTotal Input TokensTotal CostResponse Time (avg)
2026-05-19 23:35 · Initial run57/57 attempts9.210.010.017/19038,6300$0.3933.90s
2026-06-04 14:03 · New test added63/63 attempts9.09.610.018/21158,40936,936$0.5824.94s
Difference—+0.3+0.40.0-1-1-19779-36936-$0.190-1041ms

Benchmark coverage differs: 57/57 attempts (Target: 3 repeats per test) versus 63/63 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.

Charts

Choose the first model, then click a second model to open a side-by-side page.

Total Output Tokens

Score vs Total Output Tokens

Quick Compare

Gemini 3.5 FlashmediumvsQwen3.7 MaxmediumGemini 3.5 FlashmediumvsGPT-5.5mediumGemini 3.5 FlashmediumvsSeed 2.1 TurbolowGemini 3.5 FlashmediumvsQwen3.8 MaxmediumGemini 3.5 FlashmediumvsClaude Opus 5mediumGemini 3.5 FlashmediumvsGrok 4.5highGemini 3.5 FlashmediumvsClaude Opus 5highGemini 3.5 FlashmediumvsGPT-5.3-CodexmediumGemini 3.5 FlashmediumvsGemini 3.7 FlashlowGemini 3.5 FlashmediumvsSeed 2.1 Turbohigh

Category Breakdown

Category Score Consistency Tests Correct
Anti-AI Tricks 10.0 10.0
Coding 10.0 10.0
Combined 10.0 10.0
Data parsing and extraction 10.0 10.0
Domain specific 7.7 10.0
General Intelligence 10.0 10.0
Instructions following 9.9 10.0
Puzzle Solving 7.7 10.0
Tool Calling 10.0 10.0
Trivia 10.0 10.0

Compared models