Model comparison
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite vs Qwen3.5 397B-A17B
Qwen3.5 397B-A17B is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.0 to 40.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite costs 2.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.5 397B-A17B's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 29 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 29 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.5 397B-A17B in 10 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads 34.5 to 22.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 8.2% for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite and 58.9% for Qwen3.5 397B-A17B.
- Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite is cheaper at $0.25 / $1.50 per million input/output tokens, against $0.60 / $3.60 for Qwen3.5 397B-A17B.
- Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 262K.
- Qwen3.5 397B-A17B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | Qwen3.5 397B-A17B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 40.8 | 46.0 |
| Released | 2026-03-03 | 2026-02-01 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | 262K |
| Max output | 66K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.25 | $0.60 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $1.50 | $3.60 |
| Results tracked | 38 | 36 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 37.8 (#188), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 42.0 (#114)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | Qwen3.5 397B-A17B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1256 | 1400 |
| LMArena Coding | 1400 | 1465 |
| SciCode | 41.9% | — |
| WeirdML | 52.2% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 797.73 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 30.2 (#79), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 33.3 (#53)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | Qwen3.5 397B-A17B |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 24.9% |
| τ²-bench Airline | — | 81.5% |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 9.8% |
| τ²-bench Retail | — | 84.4% |
| τ²-bench Telecom | — | 97.8% |
| DeepResearch Bench | 37.3% | — |
Reasoning Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 22.9 (#186), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 34.5 (#70)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | Qwen3.5 397B-A17B |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 67.2% | 73.7% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 8.2% | 58.9% |
| Chess Puzzles | 25% | 13% |
| Thematic Generalization | 63.3% | 65.1% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1407 | 1448 |
| DTBench | 76.8% | 87.5% |
| LMCA | 35% | 37.9% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 144.47 | 146.65 |
| CritPt | 1.1% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 3% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 18% |
| ForecastBench | 54.4 | — |
Math Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 40.7 (#90), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 46.1 (#73)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | Qwen3.5 397B-A17B |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 27.7% | 31.2% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 80% | 88.9% |
| LMArena Math | 1428 | 1454 |
Knowledge Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 41.9 (#104), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 53.3 (#58)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | Qwen3.5 397B-A17B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 81.8% | 86.4% |
| LMArena Expert | 1398 | 1462 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 8.6% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 8.2% | — |
Multimodal Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 39.4 (#60), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 40.7 (#44)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | Qwen3.5 397B-A17B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1240 | 1263 |
Multilingual Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 52.3 (#86), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 53.7 (#59)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | Qwen3.5 397B-A17B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1411 | 1430 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1461 | 1500 |
| LMArena French | 1424 | 1461 |
| LMArena German | 1429 | 1447 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1413 | 1426 |
| LMArena Korean | 1392 | 1384 |
| LMArena Russian | 1420 | 1429 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1421 | 1441 |
Instruction Following Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 72.7 (#131), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 75.0 (#77)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | Qwen3.5 397B-A17B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1377 | 1424 |
Long Context Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 42.5 (#122), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 44.1 (#74)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | Qwen3.5 397B-A17B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1394 | 1442 |
Writing & Preference Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 60.9 (#94), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 62.3 (#79)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | Qwen3.5 397B-A17B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1416 | 1438 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1401 | 1401 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1417 | 1446 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1478 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite better than Qwen3.5 397B-A17B?
Qwen3.5 397B-A17B is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.0 to 40.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite costs 2.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.5 397B-A17B's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite or Qwen3.5 397B-A17B?
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite is cheaper. It lists at $0.25 per million input tokens and $1.50 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5 397B-A17B lists at $0.60 and $3.60.
Is Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite or Qwen3.5 397B-A17B better for coding?
Qwen3.5 397B-A17B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.0 versus 37.8 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite does, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite and Qwen3.5 397B-A17B share?
29 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite has 38 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 397B-A17B has 36.