Model comparison
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Head-to-head evidence from 16 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite unranked (Not scored); Qwen3.5-122B-A10B #47 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B share 16 comparable benchmark results. 3 of 8 categories are comparable. 5 results are unique to Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite; 15 to Qwen3.5-122B-A10B.
Updated July 21, 2026- Shared results
- 16
- Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite only
- 5
- Qwen3.5-122B-A10B only
- 15
- Comparable categories
- 3 / 8
Treat this as a split decision. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite makes more sense if reasoning is the priority or you need the larger 1M context window; Qwen3.5-122B-A10B is the better fit if coding is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 16 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 3 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B finish on the same BenchAlign overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The BenchAlign headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.30 input / $2.50 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Qwen3.5-122B-A10B. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 262K for Qwen3.5-122B-A10B.
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 | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Δ | Qwen3.5-122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite54.2 | Margin→ 17.8 | Qwen3.5-122B-A10B72.0 |
| Reasoning | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite72.2 | Margin← 12.0 | Qwen3.5-122B-A10B60.2 |
| Agentic | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite63.4 | Margin← 7.0 | Qwen3.5-122B-A10B56.4 |
| Knowledge | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.5-122B-A10B83.6 |
| Multilingual | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.5-122B-A10B82.2 |
| Multimodal | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.5-122B-A10B77.2 |
| Inst. Following | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.5-122B-A10B93.4 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
OSWorld-Verified
AgenticA 74%B 58%Winner: Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteΔ 16OSWorld-Verified: Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite scored 74%; Qwen3.5-122B-A10B scored 58%. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 54%B 49.4%Winner: Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteΔ 4.6Terminal-Bench 2.0: Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite scored 54%; Qwen3.5-122B-A10B scored 49.4%. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3.5-122B-A10B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite$0.3 input / $2.5 output | Qwen3.5-122B-A10B$0 input / $0 output | Qwen3.5-122B-A10B has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot available | Qwen3.5-122B-A10BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot available | Qwen3.5-122B-A10BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite1M | Qwen3.5-122B-A10B262K | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite wins9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3.5-122B-A10B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 54% | 49.4% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 74% | 58% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 1140 | 978 | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 26.8% | 20.7% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 32.0% | 23.9% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| AA BriefcaseSource | 634 | — | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | 16.5% | — | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | — | 63.8% | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 93.6% | Not comparable |
CodingQwen3.5-122B-A10B wins5 benchmarks
ReasoningGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite wins4 benchmarks
Knowledge9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3.5-122B-A10B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 36.5% | 32.3% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 83.8% | 85.7% | Qwen3.5-122B-A10B leads |
| AA-HLESource | 17.5% | 23.4% | Qwen3.5-122B-A10B leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 6.9% | -39.6% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 30.3% | 24.7% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 33.5% | 85.5% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| MMLU-ProSource | — | 86.7% | Not comparable |
| SuperGPQASource | — | 67.1% | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | — | 86.6% | Not comparable |
Multilingual1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3.5-122B-A10B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProXSource | — | 82.2% | Not comparable |
Multimodal6 benchmarks
Frequently Asked Questions (4)
Which is better, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or Qwen3.5-122B-A10B?
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B are tied on the BenchAlign overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.
Which is better for coding, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or Qwen3.5-122B-A10B?
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 72 versus 54.2. Inside this category, AA Coding Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for reasoning, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or Qwen3.5-122B-A10B?
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite has the edge for reasoning in this comparison, averaging 72.2 versus 60.2. Inside this category, AA-LCR is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or Qwen3.5-122B-A10B?
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 63.4 versus 56.4. Inside this category, GDPval-AA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
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.