Model comparison

Gemma 3 12B vs Qwen3.5-Flash

Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.3 to 31.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 12B costs 2.3× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.5-Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 19 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 3 12B Google

31.8

Rank #255 Confirmed

Qwen3.5-Flash Alibaba (Qwen)

42.3

Rank #105 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 3 12B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.5-Flash in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.5-Flash leads 32.9 to 15.2.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 16.7% for Gemma 3 12B and 84.4% for Qwen3.5-Flash.
  • Gemma 3 12B is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.15 per million input/output tokens, against $0.10 / $0.40 for Qwen3.5-Flash.
  • Qwen3.5-Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 131K.
  • Gemma 3 12B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemma 3 12B and Qwen3.5-Flash specifications
Gemma 3 12BQwen3.5-Flash
ProviderGoogleAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index31.842.3
Released2025-03-122026-02-23
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window131K1M
Max output8K66K
Input $ / M tokens$0.05$0.10
Output $ / M tokens$0.15$0.40
Results tracked2432

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Gemma 3 12B: 31.2 (#276), Qwen3.5-Flash: 33.9 (#234)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Coding12811412
LMArena WebDev—1243
SciCode17.4%—
ALE-Bench—221.8

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemma 3 12B: 25.3 (#101), Qwen3.5-Flash: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BQwen3.5-Flash
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard30.4%—
Vending-Bench 2—462.69

Reasoning Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Gemma 3 12B: 15.2 (#307), Qwen3.5-Flash: 32.9 (#63)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BQwen3.5-Flash
Chess Puzzles0%21%
LMArena Hard Prompts13091404
DTBench48.8%82.9%
LMCA4.5%29.1%
Epoch Capabilities Index123.49143.98
CritPt0%—
Mystery Game Puzzles—20%

Math Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Gemma 3 12B: 21.0 (#273), Qwen3.5-Flash: 36.3 (#117)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BQwen3.5-Flash
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202516.7%84.4%
LMArena Math13071407
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—18.2%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—6.2%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—0%

Knowledge Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Gemma 3 12B: 26.5 (#250), Qwen3.5-Flash: 43.2 (#84)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BQwen3.5-Flash
GPQA Diamond39.5%82.3%
Vectara Hallucination Rate4.4%10.5%
LMArena Expert12481408
SimpleQA Verified—20.3%

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemma 3 12B: —, Qwen3.5-Flash: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BQwen3.5-Flash
MindCube46.7%—

Multilingual Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Gemma 3 12B: 45.9 (#160), Qwen3.5-Flash: 50.7 (#116)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Non-English13181385
LMArena German13701389
LMArena Russian13351379
LMArena Chinese—1446
LMArena French—1412
LMArena Japanese—1369
LMArena Korean—1344
LMArena Spanish—1399

Instruction Following Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Gemma 3 12B: 68.8 (#179), Qwen3.5-Flash: 72.8 (#133)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Instruction Following12991374

Long Context Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Gemma 3 12B: 40.0 (#157), Qwen3.5-Flash: 42.4 (#119)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Longer Query13171392

Writing & Preference Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Gemma 3 12B: 47.7 (#205), Qwen3.5-Flash: 58.2 (#117)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text13341397
LMArena Creative Writing13311343
LMArena Multi-Turn13341393
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1126—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 3 12B better than Qwen3.5-Flash?

Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.3 to 31.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 12B costs 2.3× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.5-Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 3 12B or Qwen3.5-Flash?

Gemma 3 12B is cheaper. It lists at $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5-Flash lists at $0.10 and $0.40.

Is Gemma 3 12B or Qwen3.5-Flash better for coding?

Qwen3.5-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 33.9 versus 31.2 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.5-Flash does, with 1M tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 3 12B and Qwen3.5-Flash share?

19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3 12B has 24 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5-Flash has 32.

Related comparisons

Go deeper