Compare / Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 vs Gemini 2.5 Pro

Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 vs Gemini 2.5 Pro

Which is cheaper, which is more capable, and which does better at each kind of work, from 22 results on 4 sources that measured both models.

AlibabaQwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 Released 25 Jul 2025 · $0.30 in · $3.00 out
GoogleGemini 2.5 Pro Released 25 Mar 2025 · $1.25 in · $10.00 out
Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 wins 22 too close to callGemini 2.5 Pro wins 18

Of the 22 results both models have, the better value on each. Results whose reported ranges overlap are too close to call.

Results as of 9 October 2026 (catalogue release 2026-10-09-dd620e778ac5). See also Alibaba vs Google, every model from both labs.

Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 or Gemini 2.5 Pro? The short answer

Pick Gemini 2.5 Pro if quality matters most: it scores higher (Intelligence Index 16.1 against 12.7). Pick Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 if cost matters more: it costs 3.5 times less per token.

  • Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 is cheaper: $0.97 against $3.44 per million tokens, 3.5 times less.
  • Gemini 2.5 Pro scores higher on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index: 16.1 against 12.7.
  • Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 is newer: released 25 Jul 2025, against 25 Mar 2025 for Gemini 2.5 Pro.
  • On third-party benchmarks, on the results both models have: Gemini 2.5 Pro does better for agents and tool use, reasoning and knowledge and writing.

Head to head

12.7
Intelligence Index
16.1
$0.97
Price per million tokens, blendedlower is better
$3.44
131,072
Context window, tokens
1,048,576

Every fact side by side

Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507Gemini 2.5 Pro
Price per million tokens$0.30 in · $3.00 out$1.25 in · $10.00 out
Blended (3 in : 1 out)$0.97$3.44
Cheapest host, blended$0.75 (Alibaba)$3.44 (Google)
Cached input, per million–$0.12 cached input
Intelligence Index12.716.1
Spring Prompt overall––
Output speed, tokens a second––
Context window131,072 tokens1,048,576 tokens
Released25 Jul 2025 (newer)25 Mar 2025
WeightsOpenClosed
Developer based inChinathe US

Prices are the developer's list price where we have read it, otherwise the typical host on OpenRouter; see every model's price. Intelligence and speed from Artificial Analysis.

Which is better for what

Each model's rank among the models on sale today, for each kind of work, from our own benchmarks and licensed sources. Further right is better; the better rank is in green.

Agents and tool useMulti-step tasks with tools: support desks, coding agents, function calls 138 of 164 112 of 164
Reasoning and knowledgeHard questions across science, maths and general knowledge 117 of 198 96 of 198
WritingWhat people prefer in blind comparisons, and judged writing quality 122 of 188 43 of 188
Sticking to the factsSummarising without inventing things, and factual answers 92 of 152 39 of 152

From our research

Every shared result

Each model's best result on every measure both have, grouped by benchmark, with the setting that produced it. Under each measure, every model that benchmark has measured is a grey tick, best to the right, so you can see where the two sit in the field. The headline measures of each benchmark come first; the rest are under "Show all". Green marks the better value; where a source reports ranges that overlap, neither is marked.

MeasureQwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507Gemini 2.5 Pro
Arena (formerly LMArena) reported by Arena (formerly LMArena) · 3 results
Overall · TextArena rating, higher is better 139 · 74 of 387 measured 1,400 1,446
Business, management and finance · TextArena rating, higher is better 133 · 92 of 380 measured 1,404 1,437
Creative writing · TextArena rating, higher is better 133 · 45 of 385 measured 1,371 1,443
Artificial Analysis reported by Artificial Analysis · 3 results
Artificial Analysis Intelligence Indexindex score, higher is better 147 · 122 of 243 measured 12.7 16.1
GPQA Diamond% of questions, higher is better 114 · 86 of 231 measured 79.0% 84.4%
Humanity's Last Exam% of questions, higher is better 122 · 100 of 242 measured 15.9% 22.5%
UGI Leaderboard reported by UGI Leaderboard · 3 results
Writing score · UGIscore out of 100, higher is better 139 · 28 of 230 measured 32.4 65.2
Requested-length error · UGI% off the requested word count, lower is better 166 · 99 of 230 measured 30.0% 19.0%
Style adherence · UGIscore from 0 to 1, higher is better 194 · 16 of 230 measured 0.31 0.40
Vending-Bench 2 reported by Vending-Bench 2 · 1 result
Money after a yearUS dollars, higher is better 55 · 46 of 58 measured $-11.34 $573.64
Show all 22 results (12 more)
MeasureQwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507Gemini 2.5 Pro
Arena (formerly LMArena) reported by Arena (formerly LMArena) · 3 results
Expert prompts · TextArena rating, higher is better 85 · 91 of 338 measured 1,466 1,458
Instruction following · TextArena rating, higher is better 142 · 70 of 387 measured 1,385 1,438
Writing, literature and language · TextArena rating, higher is better 139 · 53 of 386 measured 1,377 1,445
Artificial Analysis reported by Artificial Analysis · 9 results
Terminal-Bench 2.1% of tasks, higher is better 101 · 84 of 130 measured 12.0% 28.5%
Terminal-Bench 4.0% of tasks, higher is better 66 · 66 of 112 measured 0.0% 0.0%
τ-bench banking% of tasks, higher is better 87 · 79 of 121 measured 7.8% 9.7%
Artificial Analysis Coding Indexindex score, higher is better 98 · 82 of 131 measured 22.1 33.3
IFBench% of instructions, higher is better 101 · 108 of 195 measured 51.2% 48.7%
Long-context reasoning (AA-LCR)% of questions, higher is better 99 · 116 of 233 measured 72.0% 69.0%
SciCode% of problems, higher is better 74 · 60 of 113 measured 41.4% 46.3%
Terminal-Bench Hard% of tasks, higher is better 116 · 74 of 190 measured 13.6% 26.5%
τ²-bench telecom% of tasks, higher is better 101 · 99 of 193 measured 53.2% 54.1%

Quick answers

Is Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 better than Gemini 2.5 Pro?

Pick Gemini 2.5 Pro if quality matters most: it scores higher (Intelligence Index 16.1 against 12.7). Pick Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 if cost matters more: it costs 3.5 times less per token.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 or Gemini 2.5 Pro?

Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 is cheaper: $0.97 against $3.44 per million tokens, 3.5 times less.

Which is better for agents and tool use, Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 or Gemini 2.5 Pro?

Gemini 2.5 Pro ranks 112 of 164 models on sale for multi-step tasks with tools: support desks, coding agents, function calls, against 138 for Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507.

Which is better for reasoning and knowledge, Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 or Gemini 2.5 Pro?

Gemini 2.5 Pro ranks 96 of 198 models on sale for hard questions across science, maths and general knowledge, against 117 for Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507.

Which is better for writing, Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 or Gemini 2.5 Pro?

Gemini 2.5 Pro ranks 43 of 188 models on sale for what people prefer in blind comparisons, and judged writing quality, against 122 for Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507.

Which is better for sticking to the facts, Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 or Gemini 2.5 Pro?

Gemini 2.5 Pro ranks 39 of 152 models on sale for summarising without inventing things, and factual answers, against 92 for Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507.

Which has the bigger context window, Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 or Gemini 2.5 Pro?

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 1,048,576 tokens, against 131,072 for Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507.

Run Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 and Gemini 2.5 Pro on your own prompt

Benchmarks aren't your data. Try both side by side in the playground, with the cost of every answer.