Model comparison
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite vs Qwen3.6-27B
Head-to-head evidence from 17 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); Qwen3.6-27B #93 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite and Qwen3.6-27B share 17 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 4 results are unique to Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite; 37 to Qwen3.6-27B.
Updated July 21, 2026- Shared results
- 17
- Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite only
- 4
- Qwen3.6-27B only
- 37
- Comparable categories
- 2 / 8
Treat this as a split decision. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite makes more sense if agentic is the priority or you need the larger 1M context window; Qwen3.6-27B 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 17 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 2 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 Qwen3.6-27B 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 Qwen3.6-27B. 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 Qwen3.6-27B.
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 | Qwen3.6-27B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite54.2 | Margin→ 23.3 | Qwen3.6-27B77.5 |
| Agentic | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite63.4 | Margin← 4.1 | Qwen3.6-27B59.3 |
| Reasoning | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite72.2 | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.6-27BNot measured |
| Knowledge | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.6-27B53.3 |
| Math | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.6-27B89.2 |
| Multimodal | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.6-27B76.7 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 54%B 59.3%Winner: Qwen3.6-27BΔ 5.3Terminal-Bench 2.0: Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite scored 54%; Qwen3.6-27B scored 59.3%. Qwen3.6-27B wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Pro
CodingA 54.2%B 53.5%Winner: Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteΔ 0.7SWE-bench Pro: Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite scored 54.2%; Qwen3.6-27B scored 53.5%. 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 | Qwen3.6-27B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite$0.3 input / $2.5 output | Qwen3.6-27B$0 input / $0 output | Qwen3.6-27B has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot available | Qwen3.6-27BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot available | Qwen3.6-27BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite1M | Qwen3.6-27B262K | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite wins13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3.6-27B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 54% | 59.3% | Qwen3.6-27B leads |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 74% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 1140 | 1140 | Tie |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 26.8% | 27.0% | Qwen3.6-27B leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 32.0% | 32.0% | Tie |
| AA BriefcaseSource | 634 | — | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | 16.5% | — | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | — | 72.4% | Not comparable |
| QwenClawBenchSource | — | 53.4% | Not comparable |
| QwenWebBenchSource | — | 1487 | Not comparable |
| AndroidWorldSource | — | 70.3% | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 94.2% | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | — | 54.84% | Not comparable |
CodingQwen3.6-27B wins8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3.6-27B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 54.0% | 59.3% | Qwen3.6-27B leads |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 54.2% | 53.5% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 49.3% | 53.7% | Qwen3.6-27B leads |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 40.9% | 39.8% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | — | 77.2% | Not comparable |
| SWE MultilingualSource | — | 71.3% | Not comparable |
| LiveCodeBenchSource | — | 83.9% | Not comparable |
| NL2RepoSource | — | 36.2% | Not comparable |
Reasoning3 benchmarks
Knowledge12 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3.6-27B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 36.5% | 37.0% | Qwen3.6-27B leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 83.8% | 84.2% | Qwen3.6-27B leads |
| AA-HLESource | 17.5% | 21.6% | Qwen3.6-27B leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 6.9% | -19.8% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 30.3% | 19.2% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 33.5% | 48.3% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| MMLU-ProSource | — | 86.2% | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ReduxSource | — | 93.5% | Not comparable |
| SuperGPQASource | — | 66% | Not comparable |
| C-EvalSource | — | 91.4% | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | — | 87.8% | Not comparable |
| HLESource | — | 24% | Not comparable |
Math5 benchmarks
Multimodal16 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3.6-27B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | 79.0% | 74.6% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| MMMUSource | — | 82.9% | Not comparable |
| MMMU-ProSource | — | 75.8% | Not comparable |
| RealWorldQASource | — | 84.1% | Not comparable |
| DynaMathSource | — | 85.6% | Not comparable |
| MStarSource | — | 81.4% | Not comparable |
| SimpleVQASource | — | 56.1% | Not comparable |
| CharXivSource | — | 78.4% | Not comparable |
| CC-OCRSource | — | 81.2% | Not comparable |
| CountBenchSource | — | 97.8% | Not comparable |
| RefCOCO (avg)Source | — | 92.5% | Not comparable |
| ERQASource | — | 62.5% | Not comparable |
| Video-MME (with subtitle)Source | — | 87.7% | Not comparable |
| VideoMMMUSource | — | 84.4% | Not comparable |
| MLVU (M-Avg)Source | — | 86.6% | Not comparable |
| V*Source | — | 94.7% | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3.6-27B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | — | 67.6% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Which is better, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or Qwen3.6-27B?
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite and Qwen3.6-27B 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 Qwen3.6-27B?
Qwen3.6-27B has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 77.5 versus 54.2. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or Qwen3.6-27B?
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 63.4 versus 59.3. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Self-host vs API cost
Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.
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.