Model comparison
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite vs Qwen3.6 Max Preview
Qwen3.6 Max Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.1 to 41.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite costs 3.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.6 Max Preview's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 23 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 23 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.6 Max Preview in 7 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads 52.2 to 25.7.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 71.1% for Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite and 91.1% for Qwen3.6 Max Preview.
- Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite is cheaper at $0.30 / $2.50 per million input/output tokens, against $1.30 / $7.80 for Qwen3.6 Max Preview.
- Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 262K.
Side by side
| Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.6 Max Preview | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 41.8 | 51.1 |
| Released | 2026-07-21 | 2026-04-20 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1.05M | 262K |
| Max output | 66K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.30 | $1.30 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.50 | $7.80 |
| Results tracked | 38 | 29 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 42.1 (#96), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 48.6 (#50)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1440 | 1482 |
| LMArena Coding | 1455 | 1472 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 76.7% |
| SciCode | 41.3% | — |
| WeirdML | 39% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 765.27 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 28.6 (#82), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| GDP.pdf | 10% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 4,254 |
Reasoning Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 27.8 (#95), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 40.8 (#47)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 60.4% | 74.1% |
| Chess Puzzles | 22% | 20% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1441 | 1457 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 19% | 19% |
| DTBench | 83.5% | 87.2% |
| LMCA | 37.6% | 42.5% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 145.12 | 149.27 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 10.3% | — |
| SimpleBench | — | 63% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 53.5% | — |
| CritPt | 0% | — |
Math Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 25.7 (#245), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 52.2 (#40)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 71.1% | 91.1% |
| LMArena Math | 1431 | 1465 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 26% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 0% | — |
| ProofBench | 13% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 23.1% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 4.2% |
Knowledge Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 50.0 (#66), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 57.6 (#35)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 83.3% | 87.4% |
| LMArena Expert | 1430 | 1476 |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 52% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 40.3 (#38), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1266 | — |
Multilingual Too close to call
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 53.8 (#59), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 54.3 (#46)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1428 | 1436 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1467 | 1487 |
| LMArena French | 1452 | 1449 |
| LMArena Russian | 1443 | 1444 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1440 | 1452 |
| LMArena German | 1454 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1428 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1406 | — |
Instruction Following Too close to call
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 75.0 (#77), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 75.8 (#51)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1420 | 1437 |
Long Context Too close to call
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 43.8 (#80), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 44.6 (#59)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1435 | 1457 |
Writing & Preference Too close to call
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 64.4 (#55), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 64.0 (#58)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1436 | 1447 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1419 | 1435 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1445 | 1456 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1559 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite better than Qwen3.6 Max Preview?
Qwen3.6 Max Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.1 to 41.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite costs 3.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.6 Max Preview's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite or Qwen3.6 Max Preview?
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $2.50 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 Max Preview lists at $1.30 and $7.80.
Is Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite or Qwen3.6 Max Preview better for coding?
Qwen3.6 Max Preview scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.6 versus 42.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite does, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite and Qwen3.6 Max Preview share?
23 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite has 38 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Max Preview has 29.