Skip to main content
BenchLM
Data

Gemini 4 Argon vs Qwen3.5 397B

Updated November 13, 2026. Rank says Gemini 4 Argon is ahead. Price, access, and your workload can each overturn that. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty.

Share or export
Share on XLinkedInAPI/MCP

Decision reading

The public evidence has no benchmark result shared by both models, so it does not support a quality verdict. Use the documented cost, context, and runtime rows instead. 0 results are shared. Category rows resting on Estimated evidence or different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.

Model A
Google logo
Gemini 4 Argon

Google

79.03/100

Supported · Public rank #8

90% interval 75.4–82.7

Model B
Alibaba logo
Qwen3.5 397B

Alibaba

54.7/100

Estimated · Public rank #81

Conditional range 40.4–69.0

API price per 1M tokens

Gemini 4 Argon: $2 input / $10 output

Qwen3.5 397B: $0.60 input / $3.60 output

Context window

Gemini 4 Argon: 1M

Qwen3.5 397B: 128K

Released

Gemini 4 Argon: September 30, 2026

Qwen3.5 397B: February 16, 2026

Shared results
0
Gemini 4 Argon only
39
Qwen3.5 397B only
62
Like-for-like categories
0 / 8
Supported: Gemini 4 Argon · Estimated: Qwen3.5 397B. Conditional ranges do not establish rank confidence.How the comparison works

Which one for your work

Recommendations appear only when a shared evidence basis or an explicit operating constraint supports the call. Secondary and unsupported use cases stay disclosed below the initial list.

  • Long documents

    Prompts that approach the documented context limit

    Gemini 4 Argon

    Gemini 4 Argon has the larger documented context window.

    Confidence: documented

  • Chat turn cost

    1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

    Qwen3.5 397B

    Qwen3.5 397B has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Costs use the listed standard API rates.

    Confidence: listed-rates
Show secondary and unsupported calls

  • Repository review cost

    50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

    Qwen3.5 397B

    Qwen3.5 397B has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Costs use the listed standard API rates.

    Confidence: listed-rates

  • Coding work

    Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks

    Not enough matched evidence

    Qwen3.5 397B is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.

    Confidence: limited

  • Agentic work

    Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion

    Not enough matched evidence

    Qwen3.5 397B is scored on Estimated evidence for agentic, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like.

    Confidence: limited

  • Cache-heavy agent loop cost

    200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    The page does not recommend a cost winner because at least one model cannot fit the stated workload in one request. Qwen3.5 397B does not fit this workload in one request. Qwen3.5 397B has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate.

    Confidence: rate-fallback

Which one for a specific job

Choose a job from the LLM Selector's task catalog to see the category row it rests on, under the same basis rules as the table below. A directional row stays directional; choosing a job never creates a winner.

The same task catalog as the LLM Selector. Each job names the evidence surface it rests on; nothing here adds a new score.

71.8Gemini 4 Argon—Qwen3.5 397B

Not comparable · BenchAlign v5.8

The coding row is not comparable on the public lane: at least one model is not measured or not ranked there.

Coding scores combine specific tasks and setups. Match the editor, harness, and effort to your workflow.

Open the coding leaderboardShortlist models for this job
Same basis rules as the category table below

Or describe your own job

The LLM Selector reads what you need a model for and returns a shortlist, ranked in the same order the job pages publish.

Describe the task and constraints. This selector recommends models; it cannot carry out the task or access your files and accounts.

We keep what you type here, drafts included, for 180 days, and after that only the job and requirements read from it. Nothing is tied to your IP address or account. Leave out names and other personal details. Privacy

What is actually comparable

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.

2 categories rest on Estimated evidence or different evidence sets. Those rows remain visible for coverage context but do not name a winner.

Shape of the matched evidence

Only shared public evidence is shown. Sparse evidence stays a ruled list rather than being closed into a radar shape.

A shared-evidence shape is not available.

BenchLM does not draw a radar or infer missing axes when the matched evidence is too sparse.

Category results, on a stated basis

Each row shows the public-lane category score for both models: the BenchAlign v5.8 lane for agentic, coding, reasoning, multimodal, and knowledge, and the weighted public rows elsewhere, with the same rank each model page reports. A row is like-for-like only when both scores rest on Supported evidence or the same weighted set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner.

Agentic

Directional only
Gemini 4 Argon
74.9
Supported · #6/135
Qwen3.5 397B
43.4
Estimated · #66/135
Basis
BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 13 vs 14 public rows
Reading
Directional only

Knowledge

Directional only
Gemini 4 Argon
79.2
Supported · #8/180
Qwen3.5 397B
51.9
Estimated · #80/180
Basis
BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 2 vs 6 public rows
Reading
Directional only

Coding

Not comparable
Gemini 4 Argon
71.8
Supported · #9/162
Qwen3.5 397B
Not ranked
Basis
BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 9 vs 6 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Reasoning

Not comparable
Gemini 4 Argon
76.5
Supported · #7/160
Qwen3.5 397B
Not ranked
Basis
BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 7 vs 2 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multimodal

Not comparable
Gemini 4 Argon
Not ranked
Qwen3.5 397B
53.7
Estimated · #48/67
Basis
BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 5 vs 22 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multilingual

Not comparable
Gemini 4 Argon
Not ranked
Qwen3.5 397B
93.8
#5/17
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Instruction following

Not comparable
Gemini 4 Argon
Not ranked
Qwen3.5 397B
79.9
#63/157
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Math

Not comparable
Gemini 4 Argon
87.4
Unranked · 2 rankable rows
Qwen3.5 397B
72.7
Unranked · 5 rankable rows
Basis
Provisional lane · 2 vs 2 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Ranks count the models scored in each category’s lane, so the agentic, coding, reasoning, multimodal, and knowledge denominators (BenchAlign v5.8) differ from the provisional-lane categories. Unranked scores sit on the provisional lane’s scale but never name a winner. Like-for-like rows within 0.5 points read as a practical tie.

Supported evidence per lane · bars run 0–100Methodology

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes turn per-token rates into comparable decisions. Each scenario states context fit and whether cached input had to fall back to the published list-input rate.

Chat turn

1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

Gemini 4 Argon
$0.007
Fits in one request
Qwen3.5 397B
$0.0024
Fits in one request

Qwen3.5 397B has the lower modeled cost

Costs use the listed standard API rates.

Repository review

50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

Gemini 4 Argon
$0.13
Fits in one request
Qwen3.5 397B
$0.0408
Fits in one request

Qwen3.5 397B has the lower modeled cost

Costs use the listed standard API rates.

Cache-heavy agent loop

200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

Gemini 4 Argon
$0.16
Fits in one request
Qwen3.5 397B
$0.168
Does not fit in one request
Cached input priced at the published list-input rate

Qwen3.5 397B does not fit this workload in one request. Qwen3.5 397B has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate.

Your workload

Enter a month of tokens to price it at both models’ listed API rates.

Gemini 4 Argon
$40.00
per month
Qwen3.5 397B
$13.20
per month

Standard listed rates, no batch or volume discounts.

Cached input falls back to the list input rate only where a cached rate is unpublished

Price against score, among all priced models

Overall score against output price per 1M tokens, one model per family. Pricing as of November 12, 2026.

Gemini 4 ArgonQwen3.5 397B

20406080100$0.10$0.50$1$5$10$50$100Output price, $ per 1M tokens (log)Overall score
  • 2 models at the same price score higher than Gemini 4 Argon. The nearest is Gemini 4 Carbon (score 89.2, also $10.00 per 1M output tokens).
  • 7 cheaper models score at least as high as Qwen3.5 397B. The nearest is Step 5 Preview (score 55.5, $2.70 per 1M output tokens).

Gray dots are the other priced models. The dark step line is the efficiency frontier: for a model under it, another model costs no more and scores at least as high.

See Qwen3.5 397B on the full price vs performance chart

Specification differences

Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.

Cached-input rate

A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.

Gemini 4 Argon

$0.1 per 1M cached input tokens

Google Gemini API pricing

Qwen3.5 397B

Not published

Reasoning profile

Gemini 4 Argon

Reasoning

Qwen3.5 397B

Non-Reasoning

Weight access

Gemini 4 Argon

Proprietary

Qwen3.5 397B

Open Weight

License

Gemini 4 Argon

Proprietary

Qwen3.5 397B

Open Weight

Release date

Gemini 4 Argon

2026-09-30

Qwen3.5 397B

2026-02-16

If you already use one of these models

Deployment change
The models list different providers, so authentication, endpoint behavior, limits, and feature support may change.
Quality signal
The public evidence has no benchmark result shared by both models, so it does not support a quality verdict.
Workload cost
Repository review: $0.13 vs $0.0408. Cache-heavy agent loop: $0.16 vs $0.168.
Context tradeoff
Gemini 4 Argon has the larger documented window (1M).
Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.

Questions

Which is better, Gemini 4 Argon or Qwen3.5 397B?

The public evidence has no benchmark result shared by both models, so it does not support a quality verdict. The page therefore keeps the decision tied to the specific documented workload.

Which is better for coding, Gemini 4 Argon or Qwen3.5 397B?

Qwen3.5 397B is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Gemini 4 Argon or Qwen3.5 397B?

Gemini 4 Argon scores higher for agentic tasks on the public lane, 74.9 to 43.4. Qwen3.5 397B is scored on Estimated evidence for agentic tasks, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like. BenchLM does not name a winner for agentic tasks from a directional reading; read the shared benchmark rows directly and test the models on the same task set.

Which costs less, Gemini 4 Argon or Qwen3.5 397B?

For the stated presets, chat costs $0.007 on Gemini 4 Argon and $0.0024 on Qwen3.5 397B; repository review costs $0.13 and $0.0408; the cache-heavy agent loop costs $0.16 and $0.168. Qwen3.5 397B does not fit this workload in one request. Qwen3.5 397B has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate.

Which has the larger context window, Gemini 4 Argon or Qwen3.5 397B?

Gemini 4 Argon has the larger documented context window: 1M, compared with 128K.

Self-host vs API cost

Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.

Gemini 4 Argon
API / mo$9,000
Self-host / moNot listed
Break-even—
Proprietary model — self-hosting not applicable.
Qwen3.5 397B
API / mo$3,150
Self-host / mo$13,981
Break-even222M/day
Model the full break-even

Benchmark evidence

The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.

Browse raw public benchmark evidence101 rows

Agentic

  • AutomationBench

    Gemini 4 Argon51.3%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • Finance Agent v2

    Gemini 4 Argon65.4%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 4.0

    Gemini 4 Argon57.40%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • Agents' Last Exam

    Gemini 4 Argon39.5%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • OSWorld 2.0

    Gemini 4 Argon69.2%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • CWE-bench v1

    Gemini 4 Argon68.0%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1 (6x verifier timeout)

    Gemini 4 Argon57.6%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • MazeBench

    Gemini 4 Argon12%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • OSWorld 2.1 Offline

    Gemini 4 Argon74.7%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • ExploitGym

    Gemini 4 Argon39.5%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • RoboDojo Sim

    Gemini 4 Argon34.2%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • CWE-bench

    Gemini 4 Argon65.0%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)

    Gemini 4 Argon57.7%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B52.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • BrowseComp

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B69%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • OSWorld-Verified

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B62.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Claw-Eval

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B56.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • QwenClawBench

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B51.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • τ³-bench results

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B68.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • VITA-Bench

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B43.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • DeepPlanning

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B37.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Toolathlon

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B36.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MCP Atlas

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B46.1%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MCP-Tasks

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B74.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • WideResearch

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B74.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Gert Labs

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B46.76%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • ResearchClawBench

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B14.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Coding

  • ScarfBench

    Gemini 4 Argon75.2%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • DeepSWE

    Gemini 4 Argon77.9%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • FrontierSWE v2

    Gemini 4 Argon55.0%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • Vibe Code Bench

    Gemini 4 Argon91.90%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • PostTrainBench v1.1

    Gemini 4 Argon45.3%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • Bug Hunt Bench

    Gemini 4 Argon40.7 fixes
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • FrontierCode 2.0

    Gemini 4 Argon26.3%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • CursorBench 4.0

    Gemini 4 Argon52.9%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • PostTrainBench

    Gemini 4 Argon40.4%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE-bench Verified

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B76.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • LiveCodeBench v6

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B83.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE-bench Pro

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B50.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE Multilingual

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B69.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • NL2Repo

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B32.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B52.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Reasoning

  • STEMBench

    Gemini 4 Argon2.44
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • Graphwalks BFS 128K

    Gemini 4 Argon99.7%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • GraphWalks BFS 256K–1M

    Gemini 4 Argon84.2%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • ARC-AGI-1

    Gemini 4 Argon98.50%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • ARC-AGI-2

    Gemini 4 Argon91.3%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • ARC-AGI-3

    Gemini 4 Argon46.3%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • ARC-AGI-3 Provider Adapter

    Gemini 4 Argon97.30%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • LongBench v2

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B63.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • AI-Needle

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B68.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Multimodal

  • ParseBench-2

    Gemini 4 Argon84.20%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • ExtractBench Pro

    Gemini 4 Argon30%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • Chartography (no tools)

    Gemini 4 Argon71.6%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • LVBench

    Gemini 4 Argon91.7%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • Blueprint-Bench 2

    Gemini 4 Argon54.4%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • MMMU

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B85.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MMMU-Pro

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B79%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • RealWorldQA

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B83.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • OmniDocBench 1.5

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B90.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Video-MME (with subtitle)

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B87.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Video-MME (w/o subtitle)

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B83.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MathVision

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B88.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • We-Math

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B87.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • DynaMath

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B86.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SimpleVQA

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B67.1%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • CharXiv

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B80.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MMLongBench-Doc

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B61.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • CC-OCR

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B82.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • AI2D_TEST

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B93.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • CountBench

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B97.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • RefCOCO (avg)

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B92.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • ODINW13

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B47.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • ERQA

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B67.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • VideoMMMU

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B84.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MLVU (M-Avg)

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B86.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • ScreenSpot Pro

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B65.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • V*

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B95.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Knowledge

  • LABBench2

    Gemini 4 Argon88.8%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • Morphology-to-molecule matching

    Gemini 4 Argon25.2%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • GPQA

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B88.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SuperGPQA

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B70.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MMLU-Pro

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B87.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MMLU-Redux

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B94.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • C-Eval

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B93%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • HLE

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B28.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Multilingual

  • MMLU-ProX

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B84.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • NOVA-63

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B59.1%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • INCLUDE

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B85.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • PolyMath

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B73.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MAXIFE

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B88.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Instruction following

  • Gray Swan IPI (15 attempts)

    Gemini 4 Argon0.7%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • IFEval

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B92.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • IFBench

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B76.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Math

  • FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)

    Gemini 4 Argon85.965%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)

    Gemini 4 Argon78.049%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • AIME26

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B93.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • HMMT Feb 2025

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B94.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • HMMT Nov 2025

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B92.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • HMMT Feb 2026

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B87.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MMAnswerBench

    Gemini 4 Argon—
    Qwen3.5 397B80.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

101 public results · 0 shared

Related comparisons

Compare API pricingRead the methodologyOpen the model selector

Watch Gemini 4 Argon vs Qwen3.5 397B

One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.

Read a sample issue

Join 7,000+ subscribers.

Last updated November 13, 2026