Noometry

Model comparison

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview vs Qwen3.5 27B

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.7 to 41.9 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.5 27B costs 5.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 28 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview Google

56.7

Rank #23 Confirmed

Qwen3.5 27B Alibaba (Qwen)

41.9

Rank #127 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 28 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen3.5 27B in 1 category; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads 71.7 to 27.5.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 97.4% for Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview and 47.9% for Qwen3.5 27B.
  • Qwen3.5 27B is cheaper at $0.30 / $2.40 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $12 for Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview.
  • Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 262K.
  • Qwen3.5 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen3.5 27B
ProviderGoogleAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index56.741.9
Released2026-02-192026-02-23
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1.05M262K
Max output66K66K
Input $ / M tokens$2$0.30
Output $ / M tokens$12$2.40
Results tracked7128

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

Category by category

Coding Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 42.5 (#99), Qwen3.5 27B: 38.9 (#168)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen3.5 27B
LMArena WebDev14471358
WeirdML72.1%39.5%
LMArena Coding14841427
ALE-Bench1,161349.45
SWE-bench Verified75.6%—
DeepSWE11.7%—
SciCode58.9%—
GSO22.6%—
MirrorCode8.9%—
AlgoTune2.02—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 37.7 (#34), Qwen3.5 27B: —

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen3.5 27B
Vending-Bench 23,774201.98
Terminal-Bench80.2%—
APEX-Agents35.3%—
τ²-bench Banking26%—
DeepResearch Bench47.8%—
PostTrainBench22%—
BALROG57%—
ExploitBench26.1%—
GBAEval0.8%—
GDP.pdf17%—
LMArena Search1211—
METR Time Horizons77%—

Reasoning Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 71.7 (#12), Qwen3.5 27B: 27.5 (#117)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen3.5 27B
NYT Connections (extended)97.4%47.9%
Thematic Generalization79.4%45.5%
LMArena Hard Prompts14851414
DTBench97.1%82.4%
LMCA53.8%34%
ARC-AGI-277.1%—
SimpleBench79.6%—
ARC-AGI-198%—
CritPt17.7%—
Chess Puzzles55%—
EnigmaEval36.8%—
EBR-Bench14.3%—
Mystery Game Puzzles34%—
Epoch Capabilities Index154.77—
ForecastBench59—

Math Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 62.1 (#34), Qwen3.5 27B: 38.8 (#127)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen3.5 27B
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions86.5%56.7%
LMArena Math14851429
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)59.6%—
FrontierMath Tier 426.8%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202595.6%—
ProofBench26%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)36.9%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)16.7%—

Knowledge Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 71.8 (#3), Qwen3.5 27B: 38.0 (#150)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen3.5 27B
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.4%12.1%
LMArena Expert14851428
GPQA Diamond94.4%—
Humanity's Last Exam46.4%—
SimpleQA Verified73.5%—

Multimodal Qwen3.5 27B leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 37.9 (#69), Qwen3.5 27B: 39.4 (#59)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen3.5 27B
LMArena Vision12961241
Blueprint-Bench 226.5%—
Furniture Assembly26.7%—
LMArena Document1444—

Multilingual Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 57.0 (#12), Qwen3.5 27B: 50.8 (#115)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen3.5 27B
LMArena Non-English14771390
LMArena Chinese15291478
LMArena French14871410
LMArena German14911393
LMArena Japanese14931345
LMArena Korean14551358
LMArena Russian14981390
LMArena Spanish14791407

Instruction Following Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 77.0 (#32), Qwen3.5 27B: 73.5 (#119)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen3.5 27B
LMArena Instruction Following14661393

Long Context Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 47.4 (#18), Qwen3.5 27B: 43.1 (#106)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen3.5 27B
LMArena Longer Query14831413
CL-bench20.8%—
CL-bench Life16.9%—

Writing & Preference Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 66.1 (#37), Qwen3.5 27B: 59.3 (#111)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen3.5 27B
LMArena Text14811409
LMArena Creative Writing14821362
LMArena Multi-Turn14881410
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1491—
EQ-Bench 41142—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview better than Qwen3.5 27B?

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.7 to 41.9 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.5 27B costs 5.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview or Qwen3.5 27B?

Qwen3.5 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $2.40 per million output tokens; Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview lists at $2 and $12.

Is Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview or Qwen3.5 27B better for coding?

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.5 versus 38.9 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview does, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks do Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview and Qwen3.5 27B share?

28 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview has 71 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 27B has 28.

Related comparisons

Go deeper