ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507 vs Gemini 2.5 Flash

Gemini 2.5 Flash comes out ahead, 68 to 58 on our weighted score, though Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507 is 2.8× cheaper per token.

  1. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507

    Released Jul 21, 2025

    58/100
    • ECI138.9
    • Price$0.15 / $0.75
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507
  2. Our pick

    Google

    Gemini 2.5 Flash

    Released Jun 17, 2025

    68/100
    • ECI140.8
    • Price$0.30 / $2.50
    • Context1.05M
    Full specs Remove Gemini 2.5 Flash

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Gemini 2.5 Flash is our pick

Gemini 2.5 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 68/100 against Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507 (58). It leads on capability, inputs & features and context window. Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507 wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityGemini 2.5 FlashCapabilities Index (ECI): Gemini 2.5 Flash 140.8 · Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507 138.9
  • Lowest priceQwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507 $0.30 · Gemini 2.5 Flash $0.85 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextGemini 2.5 FlashGemini 2.5 Flash 1,048,576 · Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507 262,144 tokens
  • Widest inputsGemini 2.5 FlashQwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507: Text · Gemini 2.5 Flash: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video
  • Self-hostingQwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507Publishes downloadable weights (Apache 2.0)
How the score is built
MeasureWeightQwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507Gemini 2.5 Flash
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%6467
Price25%7553
Inputs & features15%25100
Context window10%3761
Overall100%58/10068/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507 vs Gemini 2.5 Flash specifications side by side
SpecificationQwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507Alibaba (Qwen)Gemini 2.5 FlashGoogle
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)138.9140.8 (best)
ECI rank#105 of 148#97 of 148 (best)
Price per million tokens
Input$0.15 (best)$0.30
Output$0.75 (best)$2.50
Cached input—$0.03
Blended (3:1)$0.30 (best)$0.85
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 11 providersOfficial Google API
Limits
Context window262,144 tokens1,048,576 tokens (best)
Max output16,384 tokens65,536 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesNoYes
PDFsNoYes
AudioNoYes
VideoNoYes
ReasoningNoYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoYes
Availability
WeightsOpenApache 2.0Proprietary
API model ID—gemini-2.5-flash
API providers1122 (best)
ReleasedJul 21, 2025Jun 17, 2025
Knowledge cutoff—Jan 2025
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507$3.00
  • Gemini 2.5 Flash$8.00
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507 or Gemini 2.5 Flash?

Gemini 2.5 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 68/100 against Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507 (58). It leads on capability, inputs & features and context window. Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507 wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507 or Gemini 2.5 Flash?

Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507 is cheaper at $0.15 input / $0.75 output per million tokens (median across 11 API providers). Gemini 2.5 Flash costs $0.30 input / $2.50 output per million tokens (official Google API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.30 per million tokens for Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507 versus $0.85 for Gemini 2.5 Flash (2.8× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Gemini 2.5 Flash scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Gemini 2.5 Flash 140.8 (#97 of 148) and Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507 138.9 (#105 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (138.5–142.3 vs 135.8–140.6), so treat the gap as small.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507 and Gemini 2.5 Flash yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Gemini 2.5 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 2.5 Flash has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 262,144 for Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507. Maximum output per response: Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507 up to 16,384, Gemini 2.5 Flash up to 65,536 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507 accepts text; Gemini 2.5 Flash accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video. Gemini 2.5 Flash handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507 publishes its weights (Apache 2.0) and can be self-hosted; Gemini 2.5 Flash is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507 is the newest, released Jul 21, 2025. Gemini 2.5 Flash came out Jun 17, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Gemini 2.5 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.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons