Model comparison
Gemini 3.5 Flash vs Qwen Turbo
Gemini 3.5 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.1 to 26.8 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Turbo costs 39× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 3.5 Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 3.5 Flash scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen Turbo in 0 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Gemini 3.5 Flash leads 60.5 to 14.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 95.6% for Gemini 3.5 Flash and 6.1% for Qwen Turbo.
- Qwen Turbo is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.20 per million input/output tokens, against $1.50 / $9 for Gemini 3.5 Flash.
- Gemini 3.5 Flash accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.
Side by side
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | Qwen Turbo | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 54.1 | 26.8 |
| Released | 2026-05-19 | 2024-11-01 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1.05M | 1M |
| Max output | 66K | 16K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.50 | $0.05 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $9 | $0.20 |
| Results tracked | 54 | 3 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Gemini 3.5 Flash: 49.1 (#46), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | 79.3% | — |
| DeepSWE | 37.4% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1499 | — |
| SciCode | 53.1% | — |
| WeirdML | 62.6% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1492 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 911.02 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemini 3.5 Flash: 24.8 (#107), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 27.5% | — |
| GBAEval | 6.7% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 14% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 5,396 | — |
Reasoning Not comparable
Gemini 3.5 Flash: 62.7 (#16), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 72.1% | — |
| SimpleBench | 76.7% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 92.6% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 92.5% | — |
| CritPt | 13.1% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 50% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 25.4% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 4.8% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1488 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 32% | — |
| DTBench | 94.7% | — |
| LMCA | 47.1% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 58.1% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 154.55 | — |
| ForecastBench | 59 | — |
Math Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash: 60.5 (#30), Qwen Turbo: 14.5 (#291)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 95.6% | 6.1% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 62.8% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 26.8% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 76.3% | — |
| ProofBench | 31% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1502 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 56.2% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 39% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 14.6% | — |
Knowledge Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash: 66.3 (#10), Qwen Turbo: 22.2 (#267)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 92.8% | 41.8% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 66.2% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1493 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 3.5 Flash: 45.7 (#13), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1311 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 33.6% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1463 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemini 3.5 Flash: 57.1 (#12), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1475 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1525 | — |
| LMArena French | 1490 | — |
| LMArena German | 1500 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1481 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1453 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1491 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1478 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Gemini 3.5 Flash: 77.2 (#29), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1466 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Gemini 3.5 Flash: 45.3 (#39), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1481 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Gemini 3.5 Flash: 65.5 (#46), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1481 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1467 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1087 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1482 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 3.5 Flash better than Qwen Turbo?
Gemini 3.5 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.1 to 26.8 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Turbo costs 39× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 3.5 Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.5 Flash or Qwen Turbo?
Qwen Turbo is cheaper. It lists at $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.20 per million output tokens; Gemini 3.5 Flash lists at $1.50 and $9.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 3.5 Flash does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 3.5 Flash and Qwen Turbo share?
2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 3.5 Flash has 54 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Turbo has 3.