Capability
64.7/100
field median 58.2
#38 of 218 ranked models
Superseded.Google has newer models in this line:Gemini 3.6 Flash
Gemini 3.5 Flash
Released May 19, 2026 — see all recent releases
Decision reading
Gemini 3.5 Flash scores 64.7 out of 100 and ranks #38 of 218. This profile shows 23 source-displayable benchmark rows; its strongest eligible category is Reasoning at #2. API pricing is $1.5 input and $9 output per million tokens, with cached input at $0.15.
Data as of August 17, 2026 · How the score is built
Strongest published evidence
Reasoning ranks #2. Particularly strong for complex reasoning, multi-step problem solving, and analytical tasks.
Validate before choosing
23 published rows leave some tracked benchmark slots empty. Agentic is its lowest eligible category at #76.
Decision snapshot
Each value carries a field reference instead of floating alone. Markers compare this model with the current ranked and priced catalog; they are not absolute quality thresholds.
Price
$1.50input / $9 output
input median $1
cached $0.15 · batch + cache $0.075 · blended $5.25
Speed
183tok/s
field median 97 tok/s
First token 24.28 s
Context
1Mtokens
field median 200,000
Maximum output length is tracked separately
Capability shape
Each axis shows percentile within that category’s eligible cohort. The comparison outline is the median of the six nearest public-score peers; a collapsed vertex means the category is not rank-eligible.
Gemini 3.5 Flash category percentile values
- Agentic42nd percentile
- Coding79th percentile
- Reasoning0th percentile
- Knowledge30th percentile
- MathNot eligible
- MultilingualNot eligible
- Multimodal84th percentile
- Instruction followingNot eligible
The dashed outline is median of 6 nearest peers.
Eligible category ranks
- Agentic#76/131
- Coding#29/135
- Reasoning#2/2
- Knowledge#40/57
- MathNot ranked
- MultilingualNot ranked
- Multimodal#6/33
- Inst. FollowingNot ranked
Top decileTop quartileMid-fieldNot eligible
What it costs to get this score
Published API price against the public score. The x-axis uses a log scale; the dashed path marks models that are not beaten by a cheaper, higher-scoring option. Price uses average of published input and output rates.
The chart opens on the current model. Scroll horizontally to inspect the full price axis.
Current modelGemini 3.5 Flash · 64.7 score · $5.25 blended per million tokens
Horizontal: blended price per million tokens, log scale · Vertical: public score
How much of this is verified
Coverage is split by category so a strong number never hides a thin evidence base. Verified means the row is tied to a published source; provisional rows remain visible but separate.
- Agentic7/7 verified
- Coding6/6 verified
- Reasoning3/3 verified
- Knowledge1/2 verified
- Math2/2 verified
- MultilingualNot measured
- Multimodal3/3 verified
- Inst. FollowingNot measured
Verified sourceProvisionalNot measured
Spec sheet
Each documented value carries its source. Missing fields stay visible as not sourced or not published, rather than disappearing from the page.
- API model ID
- gemini-3.5-flashGoogle Gemini API pricing
- Context window
- 1MGoogle Gemini API pricing
- Maximum output
- Not sourced yet
- Knowledge cutoff
- Not sourced yet
- Input modalities
- Not sourced yet
- Output modalities
- Not sourced yet
- Parameters
- Not disclosed by the provider
- Availability
- Not sourced yet
- Cloud regions
- Not tracked yet
- Lifecycle
- Superseded
- API capabilities
- Tool calling, structured outputs, and batch support are not tracked yet
- Prompt caching
- Published at $0.15 per million cached input tokensGoogle Gemini API pricing
- Self-host
- Weights are not published
- Rate limits
- Not tracked yet
Category score record
Scores and ranks appear only where published evidence can be displayed. The table keeps the score, weight, cohort, and evidence state together.
| Category | Score | Rank | Percentile | Weight | Benchmarks | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AgenticRank #76 of 131Percentile 42ndWeight 22%7 benchmarksVerified | 46.3 | #76 of 131 | 42nd | 22% | 7 benchmarks | Verified |
| CodingRank #29 of 135Percentile 79thWeight 20%6 benchmarksVerified | 61.0 | #29 of 135 | 79th | 20% | 6 benchmarks | Verified |
| ReasoningRank #2 of 2Percentile 0thWeight 17%3 benchmarksVerified | 68.6 | #2 of 2 | 0th | 17% | 3 benchmarks | Verified |
| KnowledgeRank #40 of 57Percentile 30thWeight 12%2 benchmarksMixed sources | 63.3 | #40 of 57 | 30th | 12% | 2 benchmarks | Mixed sources |
| MathRank Not rankedWeight 5%2 benchmarksVerified | 55.8 | Not ranked | Not available | 5% | 2 benchmarks | Verified |
| MultilingualWeight 7%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | Not ranked | Not available | 7% | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
| MultimodalRank #6 of 33Percentile 84thWeight 12%3 benchmarksVerified | 83.4 | #6 of 33 | 84th | 12% | 3 benchmarks | Verified |
| Inst. FollowingWeight 5%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | Not ranked | Not available | 5% | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
Benchmark ledger
Coding opens by default. The marker compares each value with the best source-verified result in the catalog; provisional leaders do not set the reference. Expand the remaining categories for every published row.
Coding6 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Pro | Score55.1% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Mythos 5 · 80.3% | Gap25.2 behind | WeightWeighted 10% | |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | Score76.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-5.6 Sol · 91.9% | Gap15.7 behind | WeightDisplay only | |
| Vibe Code BenchVibe Code Bench v1.1 | Score48.68% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 4.7 · 71.00% | Gap22.3 behind | WeightDisplay only | Benchmark exact |
| cursorBench31 | Score49.8% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Fable 5 · 70.6% | Gap20.8 behind | WeightDisplay only | Benchmark exact |
| cursorBench32 | Score48.8% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Grok 4.6 · 70.8% | Gap22 behind | WeightDisplay only | Benchmark exact |
| EEBenchEEBench V1 core corpus | Score34.3% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Grok 4.6 · 58.3% | Gap24 behind | WeightDisplay only | Benchmark exact |
Agentic7 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | Score76.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-5.6 Sol · 91.9% | Gap15.7 behind | WeightWeighted 38% | |
| OSWorld-Verified | Score78.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 86.1% | Gap7.7 behind | WeightWeighted 34% | |
| MCP Atlas | Score83.6% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Muse Spark 1.1 · 88.1% | Gap4.5 behind | WeightDisplay only | |
| Toolathlon | Score56.5% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Muse Spark 1.1 · 75.6% | Gap19.1 behind | WeightDisplay only | |
| Finance Agent v2 | Score57.9% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Gemini 3.5 Flash · 57.9% | GapBest verified | WeightDisplay only | Benchmark exact |
| Gert LabsGert Labs Composite Game Benchmark | Score61.85% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 4.8 · 72.97% | Gap11.1 behind | WeightDisplay only | Benchmark exact |
| ResearchClawBench | Score18.0% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 4.8 · 21.1% | Gap3.1 behind | WeightDisplay only | Benchmark exact |
Reasoning3 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MRCRv2 | Score77.3% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Sakana Fugu-Ultra · 93.6% | Gap16.3 behind | WeightWeighted 31% | |
| ARC-AGI-2Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus for AGI v2 | Score72.1% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-5.6 Sol · 92.5% | Gap20.4 behind | WeightWeighted 31% | |
| MRCR 1M | Score26.6% | Versus best verified row Best verified: DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 · 83.5% | Gap56.9 behind | WeightDisplay only |
Knowledge2 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HLEHumanity's Last Exam | Score40.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 64.7% | Gap24.5 behind | WeightWeighted 45% | |
| GPQA-DGPQA Diamond | Score92.7% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Sakana Fugu-Ultra · 95.5% | Gap2.8 behind | WeightDisplay only | Secondary exact |
Math2 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)FrontierMath v2 Tiers 1-3 | Score38.966% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-5.6 Sol · 89.000% | Gap50 behind | WeightWeighted 30% | Benchmark exact |
| FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)FrontierMath v2 Tier 4 | Score14.583% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-5.6 Sol · 83.000% | Gap68.4 behind | WeightWeighted 10% | Benchmark exact |
Multimodal3 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MMMU-ProMassive Multi-discipline Multimodal Understanding Pro | Score83.6% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-5.4 Pro · 94% | Gap10.4 behind | WeightWeighted 45% | |
| CharXivCharXiv Reasoning | Score84.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Mythos 5 · 93.5% | Gap9.3 behind | WeightWeighted 25% | |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | Score33.6% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Fable 5 · 38.6% | Gap5 behind | WeightDisplay only | Benchmark exact |
Lineage
The sequence follows explicit supersedes links. Scores and prices remain blank when the corresponding public row or first-party rate is unavailable.
December 2025
Gemini 3 FlashScore 59.7 · $0.5 / $3
May 19, 2026 · you are here
Gemini 3.5 FlashScore 64.7 · $1.5 / $9
Jul 21, 2026
Gemini 3.6 FlashScore 75.5 · $1.5 / $7.5
Base entry
How to read this profile
The visual layer above carries the decisions. These notes preserve the model, ranking, coverage, and family context behind the numbers.
Gemini 3.5 Flash ranks #38 of 218 on the public leaderboard with a score of 64.67/100. It does not yet have enough sourced coverage for a verified position.
Gemini 3.5 Flash is a proprietary model with a 1M context window. It uses an explicit reasoning mode, which can improve complex problem solving while adding latency and token use.
Gemini 3.5 Flash sits in the Gemini 3.5 Flash family with Gemini 3.5 Flash Cyber. Its explicit predecessor is Gemini 3 Flash. 23 of 437 tracked benchmark slots currently have displayable evidence. Missing categories stay blank.
Its strongest eligible category is Reasoning at #2, while its lowest eligible position is Agentic at #76. particularly strong for complex reasoning, multi-step problem solving, and analytical tasks.
Radar
Full release historyGemini 3.5 Flash release history
Gemini 3.5 Flash released
Google · Model release
Source confirmed
Frequently asked questions
How does Gemini 3.5 Flash perform overall in AI benchmarks?
Gemini 3.5 Flash ranks #38 out of 218 models on the public BenchAlign leaderboard, with a score of 64.67/100. Its evidence status is Estimated, and this profile shows 23 source-displayable benchmark rows. The label describes evidence depth, not a provider quality claim; inspect category rows before choosing a workload.
Is Gemini 3.5 Flash good for knowledge and understanding?
Gemini 3.5 Flash ranks #40 out of 57 eligible models for knowledge and understanding, with a public category score of 63.3/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Is Gemini 3.5 Flash good for coding and programming?
Gemini 3.5 Flash ranks #29 out of 135 eligible models for coding and programming, with a public category score of 61/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Is Gemini 3.5 Flash good for mathematics?
Gemini 3.5 Flash has source-displayable benchmark coverage for mathematics, but the public category table does not assign it a rank there. The individual rows remain available for inspection. A missing category position means the evidence threshold was not met; it does not convert the model's unmeasured work into a zero.
Is Gemini 3.5 Flash good for reasoning and logic?
Gemini 3.5 Flash ranks #2 out of 2 eligible models for reasoning and logic, with a public category score of 68.6/100. That places it in the current top ten for this category. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Is Gemini 3.5 Flash good for agentic tool use and computer tasks?
Gemini 3.5 Flash ranks #76 out of 131 eligible models for agentic tool use and computer tasks, with a public category score of 46.3/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Is Gemini 3.5 Flash good for multimodal and grounded tasks?
Gemini 3.5 Flash ranks #6 out of 33 eligible models for multimodal and grounded tasks, with a public category score of 83.4/100. That places it in the current top ten for this category. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Which sibling models are related to Gemini 3.5 Flash?
Gemini 3.5 Flash belongs to the Gemini 3.5 Flash family. Related tracked variants include Gemini 3.5 Flash Cyber. A sibling link indicates shared lineage or a documented configuration relationship; it does not mean the variants have identical pricing, context limits, benchmark evidence, or deployment behavior. Compare before switching.
Does Gemini 3.5 Flash have full benchmark coverage on BenchLM?
No. Gemini 3.5 Flash currently has 46 source-displayable rows across 437 tracked benchmark slots. The profile exposes published, non-generated evidence and leaves missing categories blank until an exact evaluation is available. Coverage describes how much was measured; it is not a penalty added to an individual benchmark result.
What is the context window size of Gemini 3.5 Flash?
Gemini 3.5 Flash has a documented context window of 1M. That figure is the maximum combined prompt and retained-conversation space reported for this exact model; it is not the maximum output length. The profile keeps output limits separate because providers often publish those limits independently.
Last updated August 17, 2026. Runtime fields remain blank until a sourced snapshot exists.
Watch Gemini 3.5 Flash in the weekly brief
Get one weekly email when material rank, price, availability, or benchmark evidence changes are worth revisiting.
Read a sample issueJoin 2,000+ readers.