Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Qwen3.6 Plus

Head-to-head comparison across 6 benchmark categories

Gemini 2.5 Pro

65

VS

Qwen3.6 Plus

69

1 categoriesvs5 categories

Pick Qwen3.6 Plus if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemini 2.5 Pro only becomes the better choice if multimodal & grounded is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.

Category Radar

Head-to-Head by Category

Category Breakdown

Agentic

Qwen3.6 Plus
61.7vs62

+0.3 difference

Coding

Qwen3.6 Plus
45.9vs64.9

+19.0 difference

Reasoning

Qwen3.6 Plus
61.8vs62

+0.2 difference

Knowledge

Qwen3.6 Plus
63.9vs66

+2.1 difference

Multilingual

Qwen3.6 Plus
82.7vs84.7

+2.0 difference

Multimodal

Gemini 2.5 Pro
85.1vs78.8

+6.3 difference

Operational Comparison

Gemini 2.5 Pro

Qwen3.6 Plus

Price (per 1M tokens)

$1.25 / $5

$0 / $0

Speed

117 t/s

N/A

Latency (TTFT)

21.19s

N/A

Context Window

1M

1M

Quick Verdict

Pick Qwen3.6 Plus if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemini 2.5 Pro only becomes the better choice if multimodal & grounded is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.

Qwen3.6 Plus is clearly ahead on the aggregate, 69 to 65. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

Qwen3.6 Plus's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 64.9 against 45.9. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is LongBench v2, 80% to 62%. Gemini 2.5 Pro does hit back in multimodal & grounded, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.

Gemini 2.5 Pro is also the more expensive model on tokens at $1.25 input / $5.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Qwen3.6 Plus. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. Qwen3.6 Plus is the reasoning model in the pair, while Gemini 2.5 Pro is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Frequently Asked Questions (7)

Which is better, Gemini 2.5 Pro or Qwen3.6 Plus?

Qwen3.6 Plus is ahead overall, 69 to 65. The biggest single separator in this matchup is LongBench v2, where the scores are 80% and 62%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, Gemini 2.5 Pro or Qwen3.6 Plus?

Qwen3.6 Plus has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 66 versus 63.9. Inside this category, MMLU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for coding, Gemini 2.5 Pro or Qwen3.6 Plus?

Qwen3.6 Plus has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 64.9 versus 45.9. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for reasoning, Gemini 2.5 Pro or Qwen3.6 Plus?

Qwen3.6 Plus has the edge for reasoning in this comparison, averaging 62 versus 61.8. Inside this category, LongBench v2 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Gemini 2.5 Pro or Qwen3.6 Plus?

Qwen3.6 Plus has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 62 versus 61.7. Inside this category, OSWorld-Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Gemini 2.5 Pro or Qwen3.6 Plus?

Gemini 2.5 Pro has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 85.1 versus 78.8. Inside this category, MMMU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for multilingual tasks, Gemini 2.5 Pro or Qwen3.6 Plus?

Qwen3.6 Plus has the edge for multilingual tasks in this comparison, averaging 84.7 versus 82.7. Inside this category, MMLU-ProX is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: April 3, 2026

Weekly LLM Benchmark Digest

Get notified when new models drop, benchmark scores change, or the leaderboard shifts. One email per week.

Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime. We only store derived location metadata for consent routing.