Model comparison
Gemini 3.5 Flash vs Qwen3.6 Plus
Head-to-head evidence from 31 shared benchmark results across 7 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Gemini 3.5 Flash #33 (Estimated); Qwen3.6 Plus #30 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Gemini 3.5 Flash and Qwen3.6 Plus share 31 comparable benchmark results. 7 of 8 categories are comparable. 15 results are unique to Gemini 3.5 Flash; 29 to Qwen3.6 Plus.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 31
- Gemini 3.5 Flash only
- 15
- Qwen3.6 Plus only
- 29
- Comparable categories
- 7 / 8
Pick Qwen3.6 Plus if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemini 3.5 Flash only becomes the better choice if agentic is the priority.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 31 shared benchmark results across 7 evidence categories; 7 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Qwen3.6 Plus has the cleaner BenchAlign overall profile here, landing at 65.2 versus 64.75. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.
Qwen3.6 Plus's sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 60.5 against 32.9. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 76.2% to 61.6%. Gemini 3.5 Flash does hit back in agentic, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
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 | Δ | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | Gemini 3.5 Flash32.9 | Margin→ 27.6 | Qwen3.6 Plus60.5 |
| Coding | Gemini 3.5 Flash53.9 | Margin→ 16.4 | Qwen3.6 Plus70.3 |
| Agentic | Gemini 3.5 Flash77.2 | Margin← 15.6 | Qwen3.6 Plus61.6 |
| Reasoning | Gemini 3.5 Flash74.7 | Margin← 12.7 | Qwen3.6 Plus62.0 |
| Knowledge | Gemini 3.5 Flash47.2 | Margin→ 9.9 | Qwen3.6 Plus57.1 |
| Inst. Following | Gemini 3.5 Flash76.3 | Margin→ 6.0 | Qwen3.6 Plus82.3 |
| Multimodal | Gemini 3.5 Flash83.8 | Margin← 4.0 | Qwen3.6 Plus79.8 |
| Multilingual | Gemini 3.5 FlashNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.6 Plus84.7 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 76.2%B 61.6%Winner: Gemini 3.5 FlashΔ 14.6Terminal-Bench 2.0: Gemini 3.5 Flash scored 76.2%; Qwen3.6 Plus scored 61.6%. Gemini 3.5 Flash wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)
MathA 38.966%B 26.207%Winner: Gemini 3.5 FlashΔ 12.8FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): Gemini 3.5 Flash scored 38.966%; Qwen3.6 Plus scored 26.207%. Gemini 3.5 Flash wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
HLE
KnowledgeA 40.2%B 28.8%Winner: Gemini 3.5 FlashΔ 11.4HLE: Gemini 3.5 Flash scored 40.2%; Qwen3.6 Plus scored 28.8%. Gemini 3.5 Flash wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)
MathA 14.583%B 8.333%Winner: Gemini 3.5 FlashΔ 6.3FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4): Gemini 3.5 Flash scored 14.583%; Qwen3.6 Plus scored 8.333%. Gemini 3.5 Flash wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
MMMU-Pro
MultimodalA 83.6%B 78.8%Winner: Gemini 3.5 FlashΔ 4.8MMMU-Pro: Gemini 3.5 Flash scored 83.6%; Qwen3.6 Plus scored 78.8%. Gemini 3.5 Flash 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 | Qwen3.6 Plus | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Gemini 3.5 Flash$1.5 input / $9 output | Qwen3.6 PlusNot available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Gemini 3.5 Flash284.2 tok/s | Qwen3.6 PlusNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Gemini 3.5 Flash18.55 s | Qwen3.6 PlusNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Gemini 3.5 Flash1M | Qwen3.6 Plus1M | Listed context windows are equal. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticGemini 3.5 Flash wins22 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash | Qwen3.6 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 76.2% | 61.6% | Gemini 3.5 Flash leads |
| MCP AtlasSource | 83.6% | 48.2% | Gemini 3.5 Flash leads |
| ToolathlonSource | 56.5% | 39.8% | Gemini 3.5 Flash leads |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 78.4% | — | Not comparable |
| Finance Agent v2Source | 57.9% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 1349 | 1135 | Gemini 3.5 Flash leads |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 95.3% | 97.7% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 42.4% | 31.8% | Gemini 3.5 Flash leads |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 37.5% | 27.6% | Gemini 3.5 Flash leads |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | 47.1% | — | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | 61.85% | 50.60% | Gemini 3.5 Flash leads |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | 18.0% | 18.0% | Tie |
| AA AutomationBenchSource | 42.6% | — | Not comparable |
| AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource | 50.1% | — | Not comparable |
| terminalBenchHardSource | 40.9% | — | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | — | 58.8% | Not comparable |
| QwenClawBenchSource | — | 57.2% | Not comparable |
| τ³-bench resultsSource | — | 70.7% | Not comparable |
| VITA-BenchSource | — | 44.3% | Not comparable |
| DeepPlanningSource | — | 41.5% | Not comparable |
| MCP-TasksSource | — | 74.1% | Not comparable |
| WideResearchSource | — | 74.3% | Not comparable |
CodingQwen3.6 Plus wins11 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash | Qwen3.6 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 76.2% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 55.1% | 56.6% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| SciCodeSource | 53.1% | — | Not comparable |
| Vibe Code BenchSource | 48.68% | 25.56% | Gemini 3.5 Flash leads |
| cursorBench31Source | 49.8% | — | Not comparable |
| cursorBench32Source | 48.8% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 70.1% | 54.5% | Gemini 3.5 Flash leads |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 53.1% | 40.7% | Gemini 3.5 Flash leads |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | — | 78.8% | Not comparable |
| SWE MultilingualSource | — | 73.8% | Not comparable |
| LiveCodeBench v6Source | — | 87.1% | Not comparable |
ReasoningGemini 3.5 Flash wins7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash | Qwen3.6 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MRCRv2Source | 77.3% | — | Not comparable |
| MRCR 1MSource | 26.6% | — | Not comparable |
| ARC-AGI-2Source | 72.1% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-LCRSource | 69.3% | 69.7% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| CritPtSource | 13.1% | 2.9% | Gemini 3.5 Flash leads |
| AI-NeedleSource | — | 68.3% | Not comparable |
| LongBench v2Source | — | 62% | Not comparable |
KnowledgeQwen3.6 Plus wins13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash | Qwen3.6 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 50.2% | 39.6% | Gemini 3.5 Flash leads |
| GPQASource | 92.2% | 90.4% | Gemini 3.5 Flash leads |
| GPQA-DSource | 92.7% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 40.2% | 28.8% | Gemini 3.5 Flash leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 51.9% | 26.2% | Gemini 3.5 Flash leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 60.7% | 32.0% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 92.2% | 88.2% | Gemini 3.5 Flash leads |
| AA-HLESource | 41.0% | 25.7% | Gemini 3.5 Flash leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 22.7% | 2.7% | Gemini 3.5 Flash leads |
| SuperGPQASource | — | 71.6% | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ProSource | — | 88.5% | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ReduxSource | — | 94.5% | Not comparable |
| C-EvalSource | — | 93.3% | Not comparable |
MathQwen3.6 Plus wins7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash | Qwen3.6 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source | 38.966% | 26.207% | Gemini 3.5 Flash leads |
| FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source | 14.583% | 8.333% | Gemini 3.5 Flash leads |
| AIME26Source | — | 95.3% | Not comparable |
| HMMT Feb 2025Source | — | 96.7% | Not comparable |
| HMMT Nov 2025Source | — | 94.6% | Not comparable |
| HMMT Feb 2026Source | — | 87.8% | Not comparable |
| MMAnswerBenchSource | — | 83.8% | Not comparable |
Multilingual2 benchmarks
MultimodalGemini 3.5 Flash wins10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash | Qwen3.6 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| CharXivSource | 84.2% | 81.5% | Gemini 3.5 Flash leads |
| MMMU-ProSource | 83.6% | 78.8% | Gemini 3.5 Flash leads |
| Blueprint-Bench 2Source | 33.6% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | 84.3% | 78.0% | Gemini 3.5 Flash leads |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1285 | 1249 | Gemini 3.5 Flash leads |
| MMMUSource | — | 86.0% | Not comparable |
| MathVisionSource | — | 88.0% | Not comparable |
| VideoMMMUSource | — | 84.0% | Not comparable |
| ScreenSpot ProSource | — | 68.2% | Not comparable |
| V*Source | — | 96.9% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (8)
Which is better, Gemini 3.5 Flash or Qwen3.6 Plus?
Qwen3.6 Plus is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 65.2 to 64.75. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 76.2% and 61.6%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Gemini 3.5 Flash or Qwen3.6 Plus?
Qwen3.6 Plus has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 57.1 versus 47.2. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Hallucination Rate is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, Gemini 3.5 Flash or Qwen3.6 Plus?
Qwen3.6 Plus has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 70.3 versus 53.9. Inside this category, Vibe Code Bench is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for math, Gemini 3.5 Flash or Qwen3.6 Plus?
Qwen3.6 Plus has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 60.5 versus 32.9. Inside this category, FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3) is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for reasoning, Gemini 3.5 Flash or Qwen3.6 Plus?
Gemini 3.5 Flash has the edge for reasoning in this comparison, averaging 74.7 versus 62. Inside this category, CritPt is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Gemini 3.5 Flash or Qwen3.6 Plus?
Gemini 3.5 Flash has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 77.2 versus 61.6. Inside this category, GDPval-AA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Gemini 3.5 Flash or Qwen3.6 Plus?
Gemini 3.5 Flash has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 83.8 versus 79.8. Inside this category, Design Arena Website is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for instruction following, Gemini 3.5 Flash or Qwen3.6 Plus?
Qwen3.6 Plus has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 82.3 versus 76.3. Inside this category, AA-IFBench 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.