Noometry

Model comparison

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B vs Qwen3.5 27B

Qwen3.5 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.9 to 29.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 19 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B Google

29.9

Rank #301 Confirmed

Qwen3.5 27B Alibaba (Qwen)

41.9

Rank #127 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.5 27B in 9 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.5 27B leads 38.8 to 14.2.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 50% for Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B and 82.4% for Qwen3.5 27B.
  • Qwen3.5 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8BQwen3.5 27B
ProviderGoogleAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index29.941.9
Released2024-10-032026-02-23
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window—262K
Max output—66K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.30
Output $ / M tokens—$2.40
Results tracked2128

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.5 27B leads

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B: 35.5 (#225), Qwen3.5 27B: 38.9 (#168)

BenchmarkGemini 1.5 Flash 8BQwen3.5 27B
LMArena Coding12181427
LMArena WebDev—1358
WeirdML—39.5%
ALE-Bench—349.45

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B: —, Qwen3.5 27B: —

BenchmarkGemini 1.5 Flash 8BQwen3.5 27B
Vending-Bench 2—201.98

Reasoning Qwen3.5 27B leads

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B: 20.0 (#244), Qwen3.5 27B: 27.5 (#117)

BenchmarkGemini 1.5 Flash 8BQwen3.5 27B
LMArena Hard Prompts12091414
DTBench50%82.4%
NYT Connections (extended)—47.9%
Thematic Generalization—45.5%
LMCA—34%

Math Qwen3.5 27B leads

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B: 14.2 (#302), Qwen3.5 27B: 38.8 (#127)

BenchmarkGemini 1.5 Flash 8BQwen3.5 27B
LMArena Math12071429
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions—56.7%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20254.6%—

Knowledge Qwen3.5 27B leads

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B: 16.0 (#289), Qwen3.5 27B: 38.0 (#150)

BenchmarkGemini 1.5 Flash 8BQwen3.5 27B
LMArena Expert11851428
GPQA Diamond33%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate—12.1%

Multimodal Qwen3.5 27B leads

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B: 28.2 (#115), Qwen3.5 27B: 39.4 (#59)

BenchmarkGemini 1.5 Flash 8BQwen3.5 27B
LMArena Vision10441241

Multilingual Qwen3.5 27B leads

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B: 38.5 (#229), Qwen3.5 27B: 50.8 (#115)

BenchmarkGemini 1.5 Flash 8BQwen3.5 27B
LMArena Non-English12151390
LMArena Chinese12311478
LMArena French12341410
LMArena German12061393
LMArena Japanese11501345
LMArena Korean11401358
LMArena Russian12361390
LMArena Spanish12121407

Instruction Following Qwen3.5 27B leads

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B: 62.8 (#236), Qwen3.5 27B: 73.5 (#119)

BenchmarkGemini 1.5 Flash 8BQwen3.5 27B
LMArena Instruction Following11991393

Long Context Qwen3.5 27B leads

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B: 37.0 (#225), Qwen3.5 27B: 43.1 (#106)

BenchmarkGemini 1.5 Flash 8BQwen3.5 27B
LMArena Longer Query12191413

Writing & Preference Qwen3.5 27B leads

Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B: 42.8 (#232), Qwen3.5 27B: 59.3 (#111)

BenchmarkGemini 1.5 Flash 8BQwen3.5 27B
LMArena Text12261409
LMArena Creative Writing12181362
LMArena Multi-Turn11851410

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B better than Qwen3.5 27B?

Qwen3.5 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.9 to 29.9 on the Noometry Index.

Is Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B or Qwen3.5 27B better for coding?

Qwen3.5 27B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.9 versus 35.5 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B and Qwen3.5 27B share?

19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 1.5 Flash 8B has 21 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 27B has 28.

Related comparisons

Go deeper