Model comparison
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite vs Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning)
Head-to-head evidence from 14 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 397B (Reasoning) #56 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite and Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) share 14 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 7 results are unique to Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite; 3 to Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning).
Updated July 21, 2026- Shared results
- 14
- Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite only
- 7
- Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) only
- 3
- Comparable categories
- 0 / 8
Benchmark data for Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite and Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) is coming soon on BenchLM.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 14 shared benchmark results across 5 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 $0.30 input / $2.50 output per 1M tokens for Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite. Gemini 3.5 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 | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Δ | Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite63.4 | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning)Not measured |
| Coding | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite54.2 | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning)Not measured |
| Reasoning | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite72.2 | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning)Not measured |
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 397B (Reasoning) | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite$0.3 input / $2.5 output | Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning)$0.6 input / $3.6 output | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot available | Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning)Not available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot available | Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning)Not available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite1M | Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning)128K | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 54% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 74% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 1140 | 962 | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 26.8% | 19.9% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 32.0% | 23.1% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| AA BriefcaseSource | 634 | — | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | 16.5% | — | Not comparable |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | — | 15.3% | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 95.6% | Not comparable |
Coding4 benchmarks
Reasoning3 benchmarks
Knowledge6 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 36.5% | 33.7% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 83.8% | 89.3% | Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) leads |
| AA-HLESource | 17.5% | 27.3% | Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 6.9% | -29.8% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 30.3% | 31.4% | Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 33.5% | 89.1% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
Multimodal1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | 79.0% | 77.3% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | — | 78.8% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Can I compare Gemini 3.5 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 3.5 Flash-Lite and Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) today?
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite: $0.30 input / $2.50 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
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.