ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B vs Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite comes out ahead, 73 to 56 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.5 397B-A17B

    Released Feb 15, 2026

    56/100
    • ECI146.7
    • Price$0.60 / $3.60
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3.5 397B-A17B
  2. Our pick

    Google

    Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite

    Released May 7, 2026

    73/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.25 / $1.50
    • Context1.05M
    Full specs Remove Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite is our pick

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite is the better all-round choice, scoring 73/100 against Qwen3.5 397B-A17B (56). It leads on price, inputs & features and context window. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.

  • CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
  • Lowest priceGemini 3.1 Flash LiteGemini 3.1 Flash Lite $0.563 · Qwen3.5 397B-A17B $1.35 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextGemini 3.1 Flash LiteGemini 3.1 Flash Lite 1,048,576 · Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 262,144 tokens
  • Widest inputsGemini 3.1 Flash LiteQwen3.5 397B-A17B: Text, Images, Audio, Video · Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video
  • Self-hostingQwen3.5 397B-A17BPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightQwen3.5 397B-A17BGemini 3.1 Flash Lite
Price50%4462
Inputs & features30%90100
Context window20%3761
Overall100%56/10073/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.

02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

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

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B vs Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite specifications side by side
SpecificationQwen3.5 397B-A17BAlibaba (Qwen)Gemini 3.1 Flash LiteGoogle
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)146.7—
ECI rank#67 of 148—
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions86.4%—
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics31.2%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics88.9%—
Price per million tokens
Input$0.60$0.25 (best)
Output$3.60$1.50 (best)
Cached input—$0.025
Blended (3:1)$1.35$0.563 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Alibaba APIOfficial Google API
Limits
Context window262,144 tokens1,048,576 tokens (best)
Max output65,536 tokens65,536 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesYes
PDFsNoYes
AudioYesYes
VideoYesYes
ReasoningYesYesminimal · low · medium · high
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputYesYes
Availability
WeightsOpenProprietary
API model IDqwen3.5-397b-a17bgemini-3.1-flash-lite
API providers2323
ReleasedFeb 15, 2026May 7, 2026
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.

  • Qwen3.5 397B-A17B$13.20
  • Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite$5.50
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Qwen3.5 397B-A17B or Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite?

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite is the better all-round choice, scoring 73/100 against Qwen3.5 397B-A17B (56). It leads on price, inputs & features and context window. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3.5 397B-A17B or Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite?

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite is cheaper at $0.25 input / $1.50 output per million tokens (official Google API price). Qwen3.5 397B-A17B costs $0.60 input / $3.60 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.563 per million tokens for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite versus $1.35 for Qwen3.5 397B-A17B (2.4× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Qwen3.5 397B-A17B has an ECI of 146.7 and Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3.5 397B-A17B and Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 262,144 for Qwen3.5 397B-A17B. Maximum output per response: Qwen3.5 397B-A17B up to 65,536, Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite up to 65,536 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B accepts text, images, audio and video; Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video. Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite 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 3.1 Flash Lite is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite is the newest, released May 7, 2026. Qwen3.5 397B-A17B came out Feb 15, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite 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