Gemini 3.5 Flash vs Qwen3.5 397B-A17B
Gemini 3.5 Flash comes out ahead, 69 to 65 on our weighted score, though Qwen3.5 397B-A17B is 2.5× cheaper per token.
- Our pick
GoogleGemini 3.5 Flash
69/100- ECI154.5
- Price$1.50 / $9.00
- Context1.05M
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen3.5 397B-A17B
65/100- ECI146.7
- Price$0.60 / $3.60
- Context262K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Gemini 3.5 Flash is our pick
Gemini 3.5 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 69/100 against Qwen3.5 397B-A17B (65). It leads on capability, inputs & features and context window. Qwen3.5 397B-A17B wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
- CapabilityGemini 3.5 FlashCapabilities Index (ECI): Gemini 3.5 Flash 154.5 · Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 146.7
- Lowest priceQwen3.5 397B-A17BQwen3.5 397B-A17B $1.35 · Gemini 3.5 Flash $3.38 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextGemini 3.5 FlashGemini 3.5 Flash 1,048,576 · Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 262,144 tokens
- Widest inputsGemini 3.5 FlashGemini 3.5 Flash: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video · Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: Text, Images, Audio, Video
- Self-hostingQwen3.5 397B-A17BPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | Gemini 3.5 Flash | Qwen3.5 397B-A17B |
|---|---|---|---|
| CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI) | 50% | 84 | 74 |
| Price | 25% | 25 | 44 |
| Inputs & features | 15% | 100 | 90 |
| Context window | 10% | 61 | 37 |
| Overall | 100% | 69/100 | 65/100 |
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Gemini 3.5 FlashGoogle | Qwen3.5 397B-A17BAlibaba (Qwen) |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 154.5 (best) | 146.7 |
| ECI rank | #33 of 148 (best) | #67 of 148 |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | 92.8% (best) | 86.4% |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics | 62.8% (best) | 31.2% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | 95.6% (best) | 88.9% |
| SWE-bench VerifiedFixing real GitHub issues | 79.3% | — |
| SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions | 66.2% | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $1.50 | $0.60 (best) |
| Output | $9.00 | $3.60 (best) |
| Cached input | $0.15 | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $3.38 | $1.35 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Google API | Official Alibaba API |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 1,048,576 tokens (best) | 262,144 tokens |
| Max output | 65,536 tokens | 65,536 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | Yes | No |
| Audio | Yes | Yes |
| Video | Yes | Yes |
| Reasoning | Yesminimal · low · medium · high | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | Yes |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| API model ID | gemini-3.5-flash | qwen3.5-397b-a17b |
| API providers | 32 (best) | 23 |
| Released | May 19, 2026 | Feb 15, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Jan 2025 | — |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Gemini 3.5 Flash$33.00
- Qwen3.5 397B-A17B$13.20
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Gemini 3.5 Flash or Qwen3.5 397B-A17B?
Gemini 3.5 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 69/100 against Qwen3.5 397B-A17B (65). It leads on capability, inputs & features and context window. Qwen3.5 397B-A17B wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.5 Flash or Qwen3.5 397B-A17B?
Qwen3.5 397B-A17B is cheaper at $0.60 input / $3.60 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). Gemini 3.5 Flash costs $1.50 input / $9.00 output per million tokens (official Google API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $1.35 per million tokens for Qwen3.5 397B-A17B versus $3.38 for Gemini 3.5 Flash (2.5× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
Gemini 3.5 Flash scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Gemini 3.5 Flash 154.5 (#33 of 148) and Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 146.7 (#67 of 148). Their confidence ranges do not overlap (152.5–156.6 vs 144.8–148.2), so the gap is a real one. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Gemini 3.5 Flash 92.8%, Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 86.4%; FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 — Gemini 3.5 Flash 62.8%, Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 31.2%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Gemini 3.5 Flash 95.6%, Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 88.9%.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3.5 397B-A17B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Gemini 3.5 Flash leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 3.5 Flash has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 262,144 for Qwen3.5 397B-A17B. Maximum output per response: Gemini 3.5 Flash up to 65,536, Qwen3.5 397B-A17B up to 65,536 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Gemini 3.5 Flash accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video; Qwen3.5 397B-A17B accepts text, images, audio and video. Gemini 3.5 Flash handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Qwen3.5 397B-A17B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Gemini 3.5 Flash is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Gemini 3.5 Flash is the newest, released May 19, 2026. Qwen3.5 397B-A17B came out Feb 15, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Gemini 3.5 Flash Jan 2025.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.
Related comparisons
- Add Qwen3.7 MaxThree-way comparison
- Gemini 3.5 Flash vs Qwen3.7 MaxAlibaba (Qwen) · ECI 153.7
- Gemini 3.5 Flash vs Grok 4.5xAI · ECI 154.0
- Gemini 3.5 Flash vs Claude Sonnet 5Anthropic · ECI 156.3
- Gemini 3.5 Flash vs Muse Spark 1.1Meta · ECI 154.3
- Qwen3.5 397B-A17B vs GLM-5Z.ai (Zhipu) · ECI 145.8
- Qwen3.5 397B-A17B vs Kimi K2.5Moonshot AI · ECI 148.0
