Model comparison
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite vs Qwen3.5-27B
Head-to-head evidence from 12 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); Qwen3.5-27B #45 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite and Qwen3.5-27B share 12 comparable benchmark results. 3 of 8 categories are comparable. 9 results are unique to Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite; 16 to Qwen3.5-27B.
Updated July 21, 2026- Shared results
- 12
- Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite only
- 9
- Qwen3.5-27B only
- 16
- 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; Qwen3.5-27B 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 12 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 Qwen3.5-27B 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 Qwen3.5-27B. 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 Qwen3.5-27B.
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 | Qwen3.5-27B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reasoning | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite72.2 | Margin← 11.6 | Qwen3.5-27B60.6 |
| Agentic | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite63.4 | Margin← 11.4 | Qwen3.5-27B52.0 |
| Coding | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite54.2 | Margin→ 10.7 | Qwen3.5-27B64.9 |
| Knowledge | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.5-27B82.7 |
| Multilingual | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.5-27B82.2 |
| Inst. Following | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.5-27B95.0 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
OSWorld-Verified
AgenticA 74%B 56.2%Winner: Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteΔ 17.8OSWorld-Verified: Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite scored 74%; Qwen3.5-27B scored 56.2%. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 54%B 41.6%Winner: Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteΔ 12.4Terminal-Bench 2.0: Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite scored 54%; Qwen3.5-27B scored 41.6%. 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 | Qwen3.5-27B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite$0.3 input / $2.5 output | Qwen3.5-27B$0 input / $0 output | Qwen3.5-27B has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot available | Qwen3.5-27BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot available | Qwen3.5-27BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite1M | Qwen3.5-27B262K | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite wins10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3.5-27B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 54% | 41.6% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 74% | 56.2% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 1140 | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 26.8% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 32.0% | — | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | 634 | — | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | 16.5% | — | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | — | 61% | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 93.9% | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | — | 39.41% | Not comparable |
CodingQwen3.5-27B wins6 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3.5-27B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 54.0% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 54.2% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 49.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 40.9% | 39.5% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | — | 72.4% | Not comparable |
| SWE-RebenchSource | — | 58.9% | Not comparable |
ReasoningGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite wins4 benchmarks
Knowledge9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3.5-27B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 36.5% | 33.8% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 83.8% | 85.8% | Qwen3.5-27B leads |
| AA-HLESource | 17.5% | 22.2% | Qwen3.5-27B leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 6.9% | -42.0% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 30.3% | 21.0% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 33.5% | 79.7% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| MMLU-ProSource | — | 86.1% | Not comparable |
| SuperGPQASource | — | 65.6% | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | — | 85.5% | Not comparable |
Multilingual1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3.5-27B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProXSource | — | 82.2% | Not comparable |
Multimodal5 benchmarks
Frequently Asked Questions (4)
Which is better, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or Qwen3.5-27B?
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite and Qwen3.5-27B 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 Qwen3.5-27B?
Qwen3.5-27B has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 64.9 versus 54.2. Inside this category, AA-SciCode is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for reasoning, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or Qwen3.5-27B?
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite has the edge for reasoning in this comparison, averaging 72.2 versus 60.6. 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 Qwen3.5-27B?
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 63.4 versus 52. Inside this category, OSWorld-Verified 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.