Skip to main content

Model comparison

Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite vs Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning)

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 17 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

50.83/100
Margin
8.7pts
winning →
59.5/100
0 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite #111 (Supported); Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) #56 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite and Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) share 17 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 3 results are unique to Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite; 0 to Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning).

Updated July 20, 2026
Shared results
17
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite only
3
Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) only
0
Comparable categories
0 / 8

Benchmark data for Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite and Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) is coming soon on BenchLM.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 17 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

BenchLM has partial data for these models, but not enough overlapping benchmark coverage to produce a fair score-level comparison yet.

Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) is priced at $0.60 input / $3.60 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.25 input / $1.50 output per 1M tokens for Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite. Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite has the larger context window at 1M, compared with 128K for Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning).

Category breakdown

Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.

Category scores and score margins for Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite and Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning)
CategoryGemini 3.1 Flash-LiteΔQwen3.5 397B (Reasoning)
MultimodalGemini 3.1 Flash-Lite73.2MarginNo overlapQwen3.5 397B (Reasoning)Not measured

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricGemini 3.1 Flash-LiteQwen3.5 397B (Reasoning)Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGemini 3.1 Flash-Lite$0.25 input / $1.5 outputQwen3.5 397B (Reasoning)$0.6 input / $3.6 outputGemini 3.1 Flash-Lite has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondGemini 3.1 Flash-Lite205 tok/sQwen3.5 397B (Reasoning)Not availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGemini 3.1 Flash-Lite7.50 sQwen3.5 397B (Reasoning)Not availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGemini 3.1 Flash-Lite1MQwen3.5 397B (Reasoning)128KGemini 3.1 Flash-Lite lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash-LiteQwen3.5 397B (Reasoning)Result
AA Agentic IndexSource 6.2%19.9%Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) leads
APEX-Agents-AASource 12.2%15.3%Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) leads
τ²-bench resultsSource 31.3%95.6%Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) leads
GDPval-AASource 7.1%23.1%Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) leads
GDPval-AASource 642962Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) leads
Gert LabsSource 38.46%Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash-LiteQwen3.5 397B (Reasoning)Result
Vibe Code BenchSource 0.00%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 34.7%48.2%Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) leads
AA-SciCodeSource 41.9%42.0%Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) leads
Reasoning
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash-LiteQwen3.5 397B (Reasoning)Result
AA-LCRSource 65.3%65.7%Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) leads
CritPtSource 1.1%1.7%Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) leads
Knowledge
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash-LiteQwen3.5 397B (Reasoning)Result
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 25.0%33.7%Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 82.2%89.3%Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) leads
AA-HLESource 16.2%27.3%Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -15.5%-29.8%Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 36.4%31.4%Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 81.6%89.1%Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite leads
Multimodal
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash-LiteQwen3.5 397B (Reasoning)Result
CharXivSource 73.2%Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource 75.5%77.3%Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) leads
Inst. Following
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash-LiteQwen3.5 397B (Reasoning)Result
AA-IFBenchSource 77.2%78.8%Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) leads
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Can I compare Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite and Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) on BenchLM yet?

Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.

Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?

BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.

What data is available for Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite and Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) today?

Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite: $0.25 input / $1.50 output per 1M tokens Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning): $0.60 input / $3.60 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 20, 2026

Choose a model with this week’s evidence

Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.

One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.