Model comparison

Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Qwen3.5-9B

Gemini 2.5 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.0 to 33.8 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.5-9B costs 31× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 2.5 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 9 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 2.5 Pro Google

45.0

Rank #75 Confirmed

Qwen3.5-9B Alibaba (Qwen)

33.8

Rank #236 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 9 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.5 Pro scores higher in 4 categories and Qwen3.5-9B in 1 category; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in agentic & tool use, where Gemini 2.5 Pro leads 29.2 to 14.5.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Terminal-Bench: 32.6% for Gemini 2.5 Pro and 9.2% for Qwen3.5-9B.
  • Qwen3.5-9B is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.15 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $10 for Gemini 2.5 Pro.
  • Gemini 2.5 Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 262K.
  • Qwen3.5-9B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemini 2.5 Pro and Qwen3.5-9B specifications
Gemini 2.5 ProQwen3.5-9B
ProviderGoogleAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index45.033.8
Released2025-03-252026-02-23
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1.05M262K
Max output66K66K
Input $ / M tokens$1.25$0.10
Output $ / M tokens$10$0.15
Results tracked7810

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

Category by category

Coding Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 42.4 (#101), Qwen3.5-9B: 35.9 (#217)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProQwen3.5-9B
SciCode42.8%27.5%
SWE-bench Verified57.6%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)53.6%—
Aider Polyglot83.1%—
LMArena WebDev1227—
GSO3.9%—
WeirdML54%—
LiveBench Coding85.9%—
LMArena Coding1452—
CadEval64%—
ALE-Bench785.52—
AlgoTune1.51—

Agentic & Tool Use Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 29.2 (#88), Qwen3.5-9B: 14.5 (#151)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProQwen3.5-9B
Terminal-Bench32.6%9.2%
GDPval23.3%—
Remote Labor Index0.8%—
TheAgentCompany30.3%—
τ²-bench Banking13.7%—
DeepResearch Bench42.8%—
BALROG43.3%—
LMArena Search1142—
METR Time Horizons55.4%—
Vending-Bench 2573.64—

Reasoning Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 28.8 (#99), Qwen3.5-9B: 23.1 (#182)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProQwen3.5-9B
CritPt2%0.3%
Chess Puzzles20%12%
DTBench82.4%71.2%
LMCA34.8%24.5%
Epoch Capabilities Index145.32139.46
ARC-AGI-24.9%—
SimpleBench62.4%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark70.3%—
ARC-AGI-141%—
EnigmaEval5.6%—
LiveBench Reasoning89.8%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1455—
LiveBench Data Analysis79.9%—
ForecastBench61.3—
LiveBench82.3%—

Math Qwen3.5-9B leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 32.5 (#213), Qwen3.5-9B: 34.8 (#192)

Knowledge Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 56.0 (#46), Qwen3.5-9B: 46.0 (#84)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProQwen3.5-9B
GPQA Diamond85.3%79%
Humanity's Last Exam21.6%—
MMLU-Pro86.3%—
Confabulations10.6%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate7%—
GPQA (HELM)74.9%—
LMArena Expert1452—

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 45.2 (#18), Qwen3.5-9B: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProQwen3.5-9B
LMArena Vision1263—
GeoBench86%—
VPCT48%—
LMArena Document1421—
SpatialViz-Bench44.7%—

Multilingual Not comparable

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 55.3 (#31), Qwen3.5-9B: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProQwen3.5-9B
LMArena Non-English1451—
LMArena Chinese1507—
LMArena French1472—
LMArena German1487—
LMArena Japanese1461—
LMArena Korean1434—
LMArena Russian1461—
LMArena Spanish1473—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 75.0 (#75), Qwen3.5-9B: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProQwen3.5-9B
LiveBench Instruction Following80.6%—
IFEval84%—
LMArena Instruction Following1437—

Long Context Not comparable

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 59.8 (#5), Qwen3.5-9B: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProQwen3.5-9B
Fiction.LiveBench91.7%—
LMArena Longer Query1449—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 63.7 (#62), Qwen3.5-9B: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProQwen3.5-9B
LMArena Text1458—
LMArena Creative Writing1454—
Short-Story Creative Writing83.8%—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1421—
WildBench85.7%—
LMArena Multi-Turn1453—
LiveBench Language67.8%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemini 2.5 Pro better than Qwen3.5-9B?

Gemini 2.5 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.0 to 33.8 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.5-9B costs 31× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 2.5 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Pro or Qwen3.5-9B?

Qwen3.5-9B is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; Gemini 2.5 Pro lists at $1.25 and $10.

Is Gemini 2.5 Pro or Qwen3.5-9B better for coding?

Gemini 2.5 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.4 versus 35.9 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 2.5 Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.5 Pro and Qwen3.5-9B share?

9 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.5 Pro has 78 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5-9B has 10.

Related comparisons

Go deeper