Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

Gemini 3.5 Flash vs Qwen3.7 Max

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 31 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

64.75/100
Margin
8.1pts
winning →
72.84/100
1 category wins5 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Gemini 3.5 Flash #33 (Estimated); Qwen3.7 Max #10 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Gemini 3.5 Flash and Qwen3.7 Max share 31 comparable benchmark results. 6 of 8 categories are comparable. 15 results are unique to Gemini 3.5 Flash; 27 to Qwen3.7 Max.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
31
Gemini 3.5 Flash only
15
Qwen3.7 Max only
27
Comparable categories
6 / 8

Pick Qwen3.7 Max 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 6 evidence categories; 6 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

Qwen3.7 Max is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 72.84 to 64.75. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

Qwen3.7 Max's sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 97.1 against 32.9. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is MRCRv2, 77.3% to 90.4%. 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 scores and score margins for Gemini 3.5 Flash and Qwen3.7 Max
CategoryGemini 3.5 FlashΔQwen3.7 Max
MathGemini 3.5 Flash32.9Margin→ 64.2Qwen3.7 Max97.1
CodingGemini 3.5 Flash53.9Margin→ 24.0Qwen3.7 Max77.9
KnowledgeGemini 3.5 Flash47.2Margin→ 17.0Qwen3.7 Max64.2
ReasoningGemini 3.5 Flash74.7Margin→ 15.7Qwen3.7 Max90.4
Inst. FollowingGemini 3.5 Flash76.3Margin→ 8.1Qwen3.7 Max84.4
AgenticGemini 3.5 Flash77.2Margin← 7.5Qwen3.7 Max69.7
MultilingualGemini 3.5 FlashNot measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.7 Max87.0
MultimodalGemini 3.5 Flash83.8MarginNo overlapQwen3.7 MaxNot measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · Gemini 3.5 FlashB · Qwen3.7 Max

  1. MRCRv2

    Reasoning
    Source ↗
    A 77.3%B 90.4%
    Winner: Qwen3.7 MaxΔ 13.1
    MRCRv2: Gemini 3.5 Flash scored 77.3%; Qwen3.7 Max scored 90.4%. Qwen3.7 Max wins this benchmark.

  2. Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 76.2%B 69.7%
    Winner: Gemini 3.5 FlashΔ 6.5
    Terminal-Bench 2.0: Gemini 3.5 Flash scored 76.2%; Qwen3.7 Max scored 69.7%. Gemini 3.5 Flash wins this benchmark.

  3. SWE-bench Pro

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 55.1%B 60.6%
    Winner: Qwen3.7 MaxΔ 5.5
    SWE-bench Pro: Gemini 3.5 Flash scored 55.1%; Qwen3.7 Max scored 60.6%. Qwen3.7 Max wins this benchmark.

  4. IFBench

    Inst. Following
    Source ↗
    A 76.3%B 79.1%
    Winner: Qwen3.7 MaxΔ 2.8
    IFBench: Gemini 3.5 Flash scored 76.3%; Qwen3.7 Max scored 79.1%. Qwen3.7 Max wins this benchmark.

  5. HLE

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 40.2%B 41.4%
    Winner: Qwen3.7 MaxΔ 1.2
    HLE: Gemini 3.5 Flash scored 40.2%; Qwen3.7 Max scored 41.4%. Qwen3.7 Max wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricGemini 3.5 FlashQwen3.7 MaxComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGemini 3.5 Flash$1.5 input / $9 outputQwen3.7 MaxNot availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondGemini 3.5 Flash284.2 tok/sQwen3.7 MaxNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGemini 3.5 Flash18.55 sQwen3.7 MaxNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGemini 3.5 Flash1MQwen3.7 Max1MListed context windows are equal.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticGemini 3.5 Flash wins
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 FlashQwen3.7 MaxResult
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 76.2%69.7%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
MCP AtlasSource 83.6%76.4%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
ToolathlonSource 56.5%—Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 78.4%—Not comparable
Finance Agent v2Source 57.9%—Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 13491273Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
τ²-bench resultsSource 95.3%94.7%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
GDPval-AASource 42.4%38.7%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
AA Agentic IndexSource 37.5%30.6%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
APEX-Agents-AASource 47.1%—Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 61.85%64.27%Qwen3.7 Max leads
ResearchClawBenchSource 18.0%18.7%Qwen3.7 Max leads
AA AutomationBenchSource 42.6%25.6%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource 50.1%45.0%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
terminalBenchHardSource 40.9%50.8%Qwen3.7 Max leads
QwenClawBenchSource —64.3%Not comparable
QwenWebBenchSource —1568Not comparable
Claw-EvalSource —65.2%Not comparable
BFCL v4Source —75.0%Not comparable
VITA-BenchSource —47.9%Not comparable
HLE w/ toolsSource —53.5%Not comparable
AA BriefcaseSource —908Not comparable
AA ITBenchSource —42.5%Not comparable
aaTerminalBench21Source —74.5%Not comparable
AA Harvey LABSource —83.4%Not comparable
CodingQwen3.7 Max wins
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 FlashQwen3.7 MaxResult
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 76.2%69.7%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
SWE-bench ProSource 55.1%60.6%Qwen3.7 Max leads
SciCodeSource 53.1%53.5%Qwen3.7 Max leads
Vibe Code BenchSource 48.68%—Not comparable
cursorBench31Source 49.8%—Not comparable
cursorBench32Source 48.8%—Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 70.1%66.0%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
AA-SciCodeSource 53.1%48.8%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
SWE-bench VerifiedSource —80.4%Not comparable
SWE MultilingualSource —78.3%Not comparable
NL2RepoSource —47.2%Not comparable
LiveCodeBenchSource —91.6%Not comparable
ReasoningQwen3.7 Max wins
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 FlashQwen3.7 MaxResult
MRCRv2Source 77.3%90.4%Qwen3.7 Max leads
MRCR 1MSource 26.6%—Not comparable
ARC-AGI-2Source 72.1%—Not comparable
AA-LCRSource 69.3%69.0%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
CritPtSource 13.1%13.4%Qwen3.7 Max leads
KnowledgeQwen3.7 Max wins
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 FlashQwen3.7 MaxResult
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 50.2%46.0%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
GPQASource 92.2%92.4%Qwen3.7 Max leads
GPQA-DSource 92.7%92.4%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
HLESource 40.2%41.4%Qwen3.7 Max leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 51.9%30.1%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 60.7%22.9%Qwen3.7 Max leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 92.2%92.3%Qwen3.7 Max leads
AA-HLESource 41.0%38.1%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource 22.7%14.1%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
MMLU-ProSource —89.6%Not comparable
MMLU-ReduxSource —95%Not comparable
SuperGPQASource —73.6%Not comparable
MMMLUSource —90.3%Not comparable
MathQwen3.7 Max wins
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 FlashQwen3.7 MaxResult
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 38.966%—Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 14.583%—Not comparable
HMMT Feb 2026Source —97.1%Not comparable
IMOAnswerBenchSource —90.0%Not comparable
ApexSource —44.5%Not comparable
Multilingual
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 FlashQwen3.7 MaxResult
MMLU-ProXSource —87%Not comparable
NOVA-63Source —59.0%Not comparable
INCLUDESource —86.2%Not comparable
MAXIFESource —89.2%Not comparable
PolyMathSource —86.5%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 FlashQwen3.7 MaxResult
CharXivSource 84.2%—Not comparable
MMMU-ProSource 83.6%—Not comparable
Blueprint-Bench 2Source 33.6%—Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource 84.3%—Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 12851293Qwen3.7 Max leads
Inst. FollowingQwen3.7 Max wins
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 FlashQwen3.7 MaxResult
IFBenchSource 76.3%79.1%Qwen3.7 Max leads
AA-IFBenchSource 76.3%80.5%Qwen3.7 Max leads
IFEvalSource —94.3%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (7)

Which is better, Gemini 3.5 Flash or Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 72.84 to 64.75. The biggest single separator in this matchup is MRCRv2, where the scores are 77.3% and 90.4%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, Gemini 3.5 Flash or Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 64.2 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 Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 77.9 versus 53.9. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for math, Gemini 3.5 Flash or Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 97.1 versus 32.9. Gemini 3.5 Flash stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.

Which is better for reasoning, Gemini 3.5 Flash or Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max has the edge for reasoning in this comparison, averaging 90.4 versus 74.7. Inside this category, MRCRv2 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Gemini 3.5 Flash or Qwen3.7 Max?

Gemini 3.5 Flash has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 77.2 versus 69.7. Inside this category, GDPval-AA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for instruction following, Gemini 3.5 Flash or Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 84.4 versus 76.3. Inside this category, AA-IFBench is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Explore More

Google Compare Pricing Methodology Find Your Best LLM Overall Rankings
Last updated: July 23, 2026

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.