Model comparison
Gemini 3 Pro vs Qwen3.6 27B
Gemini 3 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.8 to 42.2 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 5 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 5 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 3 Pro scores higher in 5 categories and Qwen3.6 27B in 0 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Gemini 3 Pro leads 52.5 to 25.0.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Chess Puzzles: 31% for Gemini 3 Pro and 22% for Qwen3.6 27B.
- Qwen3.6 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 3 Pro | Qwen3.6 27B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 54.8 | 42.2 |
| Released | 2025-11-18 | 2026-04-22 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 262K |
| Max output | — | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.60 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $3.60 |
| Results tracked | 67 | 11 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Gemini 3 Pro leads
Gemini 3 Pro: 51.6 (#39), Qwen3.6 27B: 39.1 (#163)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3 Pro | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | 72.9% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 74.2% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1440 | — |
| SWE-bench Multilingual | 68.7% | — |
| SciCode | — | 37.3% |
| GSO | 18.6% | — |
| WeirdML | 69.9% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1481 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,177 | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.83 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemini 3 Pro: 40.6 (#23), Qwen3.6 27B: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3 Pro | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 69.4% | — |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 72.5% | — |
| GDPval | 40.3% | — |
| Remote Labor Index | 1.3% | — |
| τ²-bench Airline | 80.5% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 18% | — |
| τ²-bench Retail | 75.9% | — |
| τ²-bench Telecom | 91% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 46.3% | — |
| BALROG | 58.1% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1207 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 71% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 5,478 | — |
Reasoning Gemini 3 Pro leads
Gemini 3 Pro: 52.5 (#31), Qwen3.6 27B: 25.0 (#153)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3 Pro | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 6.9% | 0.9% |
| Chess Puzzles | 31% | 22% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 152.92 | 146.5 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 31.1% | — |
| SimpleBench | 76.4% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 80.1% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 94.4% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 75% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 18.2% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1480 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 7% |
| DTBench | — | 78.1% |
| LMCA | — | 34.5% |
| ForecastBench | 61.2 | — |
Math Gemini 3 Pro leads
Gemini 3 Pro: 49.9 (#59), Qwen3.6 27B: 48.5 (#62)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3 Pro | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 91.4% | 91.1% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 35.1% |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 67% | — |
| ProofBench | 20% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 55.5% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1476 | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 37.6% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 18.8% | — |
Knowledge Gemini 3 Pro leads
Gemini 3 Pro: 64.4 (#16), Qwen3.6 27B: 52.4 (#63)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3 Pro | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 92.6% | 85.9% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 37.5% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 90.3% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 13.6% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 80.3% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1475 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 3 Pro: 57.6 (#2), Qwen3.6 27B: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3 Pro | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1305 | — |
| GeoBench | 84% | — |
| VPCT | 91% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1434 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemini 3 Pro: 56.9 (#16), Qwen3.6 27B: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3 Pro | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1474 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1523 | — |
| LMArena French | 1492 | — |
| LMArena German | 1515 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1510 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1448 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1493 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1470 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Gemini 3 Pro: 76.3 (#45), Qwen3.6 27B: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3 Pro | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | 87.7% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1458 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Gemini 3 Pro: 44.0 (#79), Qwen3.6 27B: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3 Pro | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| CL-bench | 15.8% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1471 | — |
Writing & Preference Gemini 3 Pro leads
Gemini 3 Pro: 66.4 (#35), Qwen3.6 27B: 50.3 (#181)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3 Pro | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1479 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1482 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1525 | — |
| WildBench | 85.9% | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1026 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1484 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 3 Pro better than Qwen3.6 27B?
Gemini 3 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.8 to 42.2 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 3 Pro or Qwen3.6 27B better for coding?
Gemini 3 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 51.6 versus 39.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 3 Pro and Qwen3.6 27B share?
5 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 3 Pro has 67 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 27B has 11.