Model comparison
Gemini 2.5 Flash vs Qwen3.5 Plus
Qwen3.5 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.9 to 39.3 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 9 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 9 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.5 Flash scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.5 Plus in 3 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.5 Plus leads 32.8 to 18.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 73.1% for Gemini 2.5 Flash and 86.7% for Qwen3.5 Plus.
- Gemini 2.5 Flash is cheaper at $0.30 / $2.50 per million input/output tokens, against $0.40 / $2.40 for Qwen3.5 Plus.
- Gemini 2.5 Flash accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.5 Flash | Qwen3.5 Plus | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 39.3 | 42.9 |
| Released | 2025-04-17 | 2026-02-16 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1.05M | 1M |
| Max output | 66K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.30 | $0.40 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.50 | $2.40 |
| Results tracked | 54 | 15 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 35.8 (#220), Qwen3.5 Plus: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| ALE-Bench | 661.88 | 621.92 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 28.7% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 55.1% | — |
| WeirdML | 41.9% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1424 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 30.8 (#74), Qwen3.5 Plus: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Vending-Bench 2 | 548.84 | 0.54 |
| Terminal-Bench | 17.1% | — |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 56.2% | — |
| TheAgentCompany | 41.1% | — |
| BALROG | 33.5% | — |
Reasoning Qwen3.5 Plus leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 18.1 (#286), Qwen3.5 Plus: 32.8 (#74)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| DTBench | 76.5% | 80.5% |
| LMCA | 27.5% | 36.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 143.03 | 146.78 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 2.5% | — |
| SimpleBench | 41.2% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 56.8% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 33.3% | — |
| CritPt | 1.1% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 22% |
| EnigmaEval | 2.7% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1422 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 17% |
| ForecastBench | 60.6 | — |
Math Qwen3.5 Plus leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 39.9 (#98), Qwen3.5 Plus: 49.6 (#61)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 73.1% | 86.7% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 4.8% | 21% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | 2.1% |
| Omni-MATH | 38.5% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1415 | — |
Knowledge Qwen3.5 Plus leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 36.4 (#168), Qwen3.5 Plus: 46.0 (#83)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 7.8% | 10.7% |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 84.8% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 12.1% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 25.4% |
| MMLU-Pro | 63.9% | — |
| Confabulations | 16.8% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 39% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1426 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 41.8 (#32), Qwen3.5 Plus: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1253 | — |
| GeoBench | 76% | — |
| VPCT | 46.2% | — |
| SpatialViz-Bench | 36.9% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 52.3 (#88), Qwen3.5 Plus: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1409 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1450 | — |
| LMArena French | 1433 | — |
| LMArena German | 1418 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1405 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1385 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1415 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1421 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 75.7 (#54), Qwen3.5 Plus: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | 89.8% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1405 | — |
Long Context Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 47.5 (#17), Qwen3.5 Plus: 43.0 (#113)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 77.8% | — |
| CL-bench | — | 19.8% |
| CL-bench Life | — | 12.4% |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1419 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 53.8 (#157), Qwen3.5 Plus: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1417 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1400 | — |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 76.5% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1137 | — |
| WildBench | 81.7% | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1408 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.5 Flash better than Qwen3.5 Plus?
Qwen3.5 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.9 to 39.3 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Flash or Qwen3.5 Plus?
Gemini 2.5 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $2.50 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5 Plus lists at $0.40 and $2.40.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 2.5 Flash does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.5 Flash and Qwen3.5 Plus share?
9 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.5 Flash has 54 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 Plus has 15.