Head-to-head comparison across 6benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Gemini 3.5 Flash
88
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
64
Verified leaderboard positions: Gemini 3.5 Flash #7 · Qwen3.5-122B-A10B #10
Pick Gemini 3.5 Flash if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3.5-122B-A10B only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Agentic
+21.1 difference
Coding
+17.5 difference
Reasoning
+14.5 difference
Knowledge
+23.6 difference
Multimodal
+6.6 difference
Inst. Following
+17.1 difference
Gemini 3.5 Flash
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
$1.5 / $9
$0 / $0
284.2 t/s
N/A
18.55s
N/A
1M
262K
Pick Gemini 3.5 Flash if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3.5-122B-A10B only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Gemini 3.5 Flash is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 88 to 64. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Gemini 3.5 Flash's sharpest advantage is in agentic, where it averages 77.2 against 56.1. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 76.2% to 49.4%. Qwen3.5-122B-A10B does hit back in knowledge, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
Gemini 3.5 Flash is also the more expensive model on tokens at $1.50 input / $9.00 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 gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 262K for Qwen3.5-122B-A10B.
Gemini 3.5 Flash is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 88 to 64. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 76.2% and 49.4%.
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 81.6 versus 58. Inside this category, GPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 72 versus 54.5. Gemini 3.5 Flash stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Gemini 3.5 Flash has the edge for reasoning in this comparison, averaging 74.7 versus 60.2. Qwen3.5-122B-A10B stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Gemini 3.5 Flash has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 77.2 versus 56.1. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Gemini 3.5 Flash has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 83.8 versus 77.2. Inside this category, CharXiv is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 93.4 versus 76.3. Gemini 3.5 Flash stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.