Noometry

Model comparison

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview vs Qwen3.5-Flash

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.7 to 42.5 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.5-Flash costs 26× 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 . 32 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview Google

56.7

Rank #23 Confirmed

Qwen3.5-Flash Alibaba (Qwen)

42.5

Rank #112 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 32 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen3.5-Flash in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads 71.7 to 33.7.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is SimpleQA Verified: 73.5% for Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview and 20.3% for Qwen3.5-Flash.
  • Qwen3.5-Flash is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.40 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 1M.

Side by side

Gemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen3.5-Flash
ProviderGoogleAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index56.742.5
Released2026-02-192026-02-23
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1.05M1M
Max output66K66K
Input $ / M tokens$2$0.10
Output $ / M tokens$12$0.40
Results tracked7132

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-Flash: 34.2 (#242)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena WebDev14471244
LMArena Coding14841412
ALE-Bench1,161221.8
SWE-bench Verified75.6%—
DeepSWE11.7%—
SciCode58.9%—
GSO22.6%—
WeirdML72.1%—
MirrorCode8.9%—
AlgoTune2.02—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 37.7 (#34), Qwen3.5-Flash: —

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen3.5-Flash
Vending-Bench 23,774462.69
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-Flash: 33.7 (#72)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen3.5-Flash
Chess Puzzles55%21%
LMArena Hard Prompts14851403
Mystery Game Puzzles34%20%
DTBench97.1%82.9%
LMCA53.8%29.1%
Epoch Capabilities Index154.77143.98
ARC-AGI-277.1%—
SimpleBench79.6%—
NYT Connections (extended)97.4%—
ARC-AGI-198%—
CritPt17.7%—
EnigmaEval36.8%—
Thematic Generalization79.4%—
EBR-Bench14.3%—
ForecastBench59—

Math Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 62.1 (#34), Qwen3.5-Flash: 37.4 (#158)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen3.5-Flash
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)59.6%18.2%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202595.6%84.4%
LMArena Math14851407
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)36.9%6.2%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)16.7%0%
FrontierMath Tier 426.8%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions86.5%—
ProofBench26%—

Knowledge Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 71.8 (#3), Qwen3.5-Flash: 43.2 (#93)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen3.5-Flash
GPQA Diamond94.4%82.3%
SimpleQA Verified73.5%20.3%
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.4%10.5%
LMArena Expert14851407
Humanity's Last Exam46.4%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 37.9 (#69), Qwen3.5-Flash: —

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Vision1296—
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-Flash: 50.5 (#121)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Non-English14771385
LMArena Chinese15291446
LMArena French14871412
LMArena German14911390
LMArena Japanese14931368
LMArena Korean14551344
LMArena Russian14981379
LMArena Spanish14791400

Instruction Following Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 77.0 (#32), Qwen3.5-Flash: 72.6 (#139)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Instruction Following14661374

Long Context Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 47.4 (#18), Qwen3.5-Flash: 42.4 (#124)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Longer Query14831392
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-Flash: 57.9 (#122)

BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text14811397
LMArena Creative Writing14821343
LMArena Multi-Turn14881393
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1491—
EQ-Bench 41142—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview better than Qwen3.5-Flash?

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.7 to 42.5 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.5-Flash costs 26× 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-Flash?

Qwen3.5-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview lists at $2 and $12.

Is Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview or Qwen3.5-Flash better for coding?

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.5 versus 34.2 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.

How many benchmarks do Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview and Qwen3.5-Flash share?

32 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview has 71 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5-Flash has 32.

Related comparisons

Go deeper