Model comparison
Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
Head-to-head evidence from 15 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Gemini 2.5 Pro #70 (Supported); Qwen3.5-35B-A3B #72 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Gemini 2.5 Pro and Qwen3.5-35B-A3B share 15 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 9 results are unique to Gemini 2.5 Pro; 13 to Qwen3.5-35B-A3B.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 15
- Gemini 2.5 Pro only
- 9
- Qwen3.5-35B-A3B only
- 13
- Comparable categories
- 2 / 8
Pick Gemini 2.5 Pro if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3.5-35B-A3B only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 15 shared benchmark results across 6 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 2.5 Pro has the cleaner BenchAlign overall profile here, landing at 57.25 versus 56.97. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.
Gemini 2.5 Pro's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 63.8 against 60.6. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Verified, 63.8% to 69.2%. Qwen3.5-35B-A3B does hit back in knowledge, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
Gemini 2.5 Pro is also the more expensive model on tokens at $1.25 input / $10.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Qwen3.5-35B-A3B. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. Qwen3.5-35B-A3B is the reasoning model in the pair, while Gemini 2.5 Pro is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Gemini 2.5 Pro gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 262K for Qwen3.5-35B-A3B.
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 2.5 Pro | Δ | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | Gemini 2.5 Pro27.4 | Margin→ 54.2 | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B81.6 |
| Coding | Gemini 2.5 Pro63.8 | Margin← 3.2 | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B60.6 |
| Agentic | Gemini 2.5 ProNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B51.0 |
| Reasoning | Gemini 2.5 ProNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B59.0 |
| Math | Gemini 2.5 Pro11.6 | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.5-35B-A3BNot measured |
| Multilingual | Gemini 2.5 ProNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B81.0 |
| Inst. Following | Gemini 2.5 ProNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B91.9 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 63.8%B 69.2%Winner: Qwen3.5-35B-A3BΔ 5.4SWE-bench Verified: Gemini 2.5 Pro scored 63.8%; Qwen3.5-35B-A3B scored 69.2%. Qwen3.5-35B-A3B wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
GPQA
KnowledgeA 83%B 84.2%Winner: Qwen3.5-35B-A3BΔ 1.2GPQA: Gemini 2.5 Pro scored 83%; Qwen3.5-35B-A3B scored 84.2%. Qwen3.5-35B-A3B wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Gemini 2.5 Pro$1.25 input / $10 output | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B$0 input / $0 output | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Gemini 2.5 Pro117 tok/s | Qwen3.5-35B-A3BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Gemini 2.5 Pro21.19 s | Qwen3.5-35B-A3BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Gemini 2.5 Pro1M | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B262K | Gemini 2.5 Pro lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 7.1% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 54.1% | 89.2% | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B leads |
| Gert LabsSource | 42.01% | 28.96% | Gemini 2.5 Pro leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 8.3% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 665 | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 40.5% | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | — | 61% | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | — | 54.5% | Not comparable |
CodingGemini 2.5 Pro wins5 benchmarks
Reasoning3 benchmarks
KnowledgeQwen3.5-35B-A3B wins10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 83% | 84.2% | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B leads |
| HLESource | 18.8% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 25.8% | 29.3% | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 84.4% | 84.5% | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B leads |
| AA-HLESource | 21.1% | 19.7% | Gemini 2.5 Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -14.3% | -46.4% | Gemini 2.5 Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 39.0% | 20.5% | Gemini 2.5 Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 87.4% | 84.0% | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B leads |
| MMLU-ProSource | — | 85.3% | Not comparable |
| SuperGPQASource | — | 63.4% | Not comparable |
Math2 benchmarks
Multilingual1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProXSource | — | 81% | Not comparable |
Multimodal6 benchmarks
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Which is better, Gemini 2.5 Pro or Qwen3.5-35B-A3B?
Gemini 2.5 Pro is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 57.25 to 56.97. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 63.8% and 69.2%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Gemini 2.5 Pro or Qwen3.5-35B-A3B?
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 81.6 versus 27.4. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, Gemini 2.5 Pro or Qwen3.5-35B-A3B?
Gemini 2.5 Pro has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 63.8 versus 60.6. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
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.