AD
Track all your projects in one dashboard. Get 📊stats, 🔥heatmaps and 👀recordings in one self-hosted dashboard.
uxwizz.com
#30

Gemini 3.7 Flash

Google Release: 2026-08-14 Tested on: 2026-10-01 09:30 google/gemini-3.7-flash::low
~500B total (~20B active)MoEClosedEstimated
(high) (medium) (low)

Summary

Gemini 3.7 Flash scores 9.4 on AI BENCHY and ranks #30. It has 10.0 reliability, a 95.7% pass rate, $0.183 total cost, and 6.24s average response time.

What makes Gemini 3.7 Flash unique: It stands out most in Domain specific, where it ranks #1, while Coding is its weakest area at #17. Its total benchmark cost is unusually low for its score range. It is notably fast compared with similar models.

Model facts

Researched on 2026-08-14

Estimated
Parameters
~500B total (~20B active)
Architecture
MoE
Availability
Closed
License
-

Best estimate from public evidence; the vendor did not disclose every value. Google documents this model as based on Gemini 3.6 Flash but does not disclose architecture or parameter counts; estimates follow the related 3.6 Flash record.

Parameter source Availability source

Score

9.4

Consistency

9.3

Reliability

10.0

Total Cost (Current Price)

$0.183

Total Output Tokens

38,453

Total Input Tokens

188,519

Input Price

$0.750 / 1M

Output Price

$3.750 / 1M

Cache Read Price

$0.075 / 1M

Cache Write Price

$0.042 / 1M

Cache prices apply to input tokens. Reads reuse cached prompts; writes store them and can cost extra. Output tokens use the output price.

Tests Correct

Wrong Tests: 2

Attempt pass rate: 95.7%

Flaky tests

2

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

Response Time (avg)

6.24s

Response Time (max): 58.75s

Response Time (total): 143.56s

Wrong answer: 2

Hamster playing table tennis

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

#30 Gemini 3.7 Flash

low
Cost
$0.010
Time
23.5s
Tokens
5,210 tok

Run history

Tested on Score Reliability Tests Correct Total Cost Compare
2026-10-01 09:30 Re-test 9.4 10.0 $0.183 Current run
2026-08-14 00:37 Initial run 9.2 10.0 $0.106 Compare

This run used a different benchmark suite. Keep suite changes in mind when reading historical movement.

Run comparison

RunBenchmark coverageScoreConsistencyReliabilityTests CorrectFlaky testsTotal Output TokensTotal Input TokensTotal CostResponse Time (avg)
2026-10-01 09:30 · Current run69/69 attempts9.49.310.021/23238,453188,519$0.1836.24s
2026-08-14 00:37 · Initial run66/66 attempts9.29.610.020/22138,10490,313$0.1063.96s
Difference—+0.2-0.30.0+1+1+349+98206+$0.077+2284ms

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 $0.375 / 1M $1.875 / 1M N/A N/A
2026-10-01 18:33 $0.750 / 1M $3.750 / 1M $0.075 / 1M $0.042 / 1M

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 3.7 FlashlowvsClaude Opus 5.5highGemini 3.7 FlashlowvsClaude Opus 5highGemini 3.7 FlashlowvsGPT-6.1 TerramaxGemini 3.7 FlashlowvsClaude Opus 5mediumGemini 3.7 FlashlowvsClaude Opus 5.5lowGemini 3.7 FlashlowvsGPT-6.1 TerraxhighGemini 3.7 FlashlowvsGPT-5.5lowGemini 3.7 FlashlowvsGPT-6.1 TerralowGemini 3.7 FlashlowvsGPT-5.6 SolhighGemini 3.7 FlashlowvsSeed 2.1 Turbolow

Category Breakdown

Category Score Consistency Tests Correct
Agentic 10.0 10.0
Anti-AI Tricks 10.0 10.0
Coding 7.6 7.2
Combined 10.0 10.0
Data parsing and extraction 10.0 10.0
Domain specific 8.2 7.2
General Intelligence 10.0 10.0
Instructions following 10.0 10.0
Puzzle Solving 10.0 10.0
Tool Calling 10.0 10.0
Trivia 10.0 10.0

Compared models