Compare / Qwen3.5-27B vs Gemini 2.5 Flash
Qwen3.5-27B vs Gemini 2.5 Flash
Which is cheaper, which is more capable, and which does better at each kind of work, from 17 results on 4 sources that measured both models.
Of the 17 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.
Qwen3.5-27B or Gemini 2.5 Flash? The short answer
Pick Qwen3.5-27B: it scores higher (Intelligence Index 22.9 against 13.1) at about the same price.
- They cost about the same: $0.74 and $0.85 per million tokens (three input to one output).
- Qwen3.5-27B scores higher on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index: 22.9 against 13.1.
- Qwen3.5-27B is newer: released 24 Feb 2026, against 17 Apr 2025 for Gemini 2.5 Flash.
- On third-party benchmarks, on the results both models have: Qwen3.5-27B does better for reasoning and knowledge; Gemini 2.5 Flash for agents and tool use and sticking to the facts.
Head to head
Every fact side by side
| Qwen3.5-27B | Gemini 2.5 Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Price per million tokens | $0.27 in · $2.16 out | $0.30 in · $2.50 out |
| Blended (3 in : 1 out) | $0.74 | $0.85 |
| Cheapest host, blended | $0.54 (Alibaba) | $0.85 (Google) |
| Cached input, per million | – | $0.030 cached input |
| Intelligence Index | 22.9 | 13.1 |
| Spring Prompt overall | – | – |
| Output speed, tokens a second | – | – |
| Context window | 262,144 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens |
| Released | 24 Feb 2026 (newer) | 17 Apr 2025 |
| Weights | Open | Closed |
| Developer based in | China | the 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.
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.
| Measure | Qwen3.5-27B | Gemini 2.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Arena (formerly LMArena) reported by Arena (formerly LMArena) · 3 results | ||
| Overall · TextArena rating, higher is better 129 · 127 of 387 measured | 1,409 | 1,409 |
| Overall · Text factualityArena rating, higher is better 112 · 86 of 163 measured | 1,420 | 1,437 |
| Business, management and finance · TextArena rating, higher is better 128 · 143 of 380 measured | 1,408 | 1,399 |
| Artificial Analysis reported by Artificial Analysis · 3 results | ||
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence Indexindex score, higher is better 86 · 141 of 243 measured | 22.9 | 13.1thinking reasoning |
| GPQA Diamond% of questions, higher is better 74 · 114 of 231 measured | 85.8% | 79.0%thinking reasoning |
| Humanity's Last Exam% of questions, higher is better 95 · 138 of 242 measured | 23.9% | 12.1%thinking reasoning |
| Vectara Hallucination Leaderboard reported by Vectara Hallucination Leaderboard · 2 results | ||
| Hallucination rate · Vectara% of summaries, lower is better 80 · 39 of 104 measured | 12.1% | 7.8% |
| Answer rate · Vectara% of documents, higher is better 31 · 65 of 104 measured | 99.8% | 99.0% |
| Vending-Bench 2 reported by Vending-Bench 2 · 1 result | ||
| Money after a yearUS dollars, higher is better 50 · 47 of 58 measured | $201.98 | $548.84 |
Show all 17 results (8 more)
| Measure | Qwen3.5-27B | Gemini 2.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Arena (formerly LMArena) reported by Arena (formerly LMArena) · 4 results | ||
| Creative writing · TextArena rating, higher is better 145 · 102 of 385 measured | 1,358 | 1,394 |
| Expert prompts · TextArena rating, higher is better 112 · 131 of 338 measured | 1,441 | 1,424 |
| Instruction following · TextArena rating, higher is better 122 · 125 of 387 measured | 1,401 | 1,399 |
| Writing, literature and language · TextArena rating, higher is better 135 · 104 of 386 measured | 1,380 | 1,402 |
| Artificial Analysis reported by Artificial Analysis · 4 results | ||
| IFBench% of instructions, higher is better 24 · 105 of 195 measured | 75.6% | 50.3%thinking reasoning |
| Long-context reasoning (AA-LCR)% of questions, higher is better 63 · 125 of 233 measured | 77.7% | 65.3%thinking reasoning |
| Terminal-Bench Hard% of tasks, higher is better 61 · 116 of 190 measured | 32.6% | 13.6%thinking reasoning |
| τ²-bench telecom% of tasks, higher is better 28 · 130 of 193 measured | 93.9% | 31.6%thinking reasoning |
Compare them with other models
Quick answers
Is Qwen3.5-27B better than Gemini 2.5 Flash?
Pick Qwen3.5-27B: it scores higher (Intelligence Index 22.9 against 13.1) at about the same price.
Which is cheaper, Qwen3.5-27B or Gemini 2.5 Flash?
They cost about the same: $0.74 and $0.85 per million tokens (three input to one output).
Which is better for agents and tool use, Qwen3.5-27B or Gemini 2.5 Flash?
Gemini 2.5 Flash ranks 77 of 164 models on sale for multi-step tasks with tools: support desks, coding agents, function calls, against 145 for Qwen3.5-27B.
Which is better for reasoning and knowledge, Qwen3.5-27B or Gemini 2.5 Flash?
Qwen3.5-27B ranks 82 of 198 models on sale for hard questions across science, maths and general knowledge, against 119 for Gemini 2.5 Flash.
Which is better for writing, Qwen3.5-27B or Gemini 2.5 Flash?
Gemini 2.5 Flash ranks 95 of 188 models on sale for what people prefer in blind comparisons, and judged writing quality, against 98 for Qwen3.5-27B.
Which is better for sticking to the facts, Qwen3.5-27B or Gemini 2.5 Flash?
Gemini 2.5 Flash ranks 67 of 152 models on sale for summarising without inventing things, and factual answers, against 121 for Qwen3.5-27B.
Which has the bigger context window, Qwen3.5-27B or Gemini 2.5 Flash?
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 1,048,576 tokens, against 262,144 for Qwen3.5-27B.
Run Qwen3.5-27B and Gemini 2.5 Flash on your own prompt
Benchmarks aren't your data. Try both side by side in the playground, with the cost of every answer.