Compare / Qwen3.5-35B-A3B vs Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B vs Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
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.
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 14 October 2026 (catalogue release 2026-10-14-7d7cf32c3f6d). See also Alibaba vs Google, every model from both labs.
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B or Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview? The short answer
Pick Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview if quality matters most: it scores higher (Intelligence Index 29.7 against 19.3). Pick Qwen3.5-35B-A3B if cost matters more: it costs 10 times less per token.
- Qwen3.5-35B-A3B is cheaper: $0.45 against $4.50 per million tokens, 10 times less.
- Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview scores higher on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index: 29.7 against 19.3.
- Qwen3.5-35B-A3B is newer: released 24 Feb 2026, against 19 Feb 2026 for Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview.
- On third-party benchmarks, on the results both models have: Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview does better for agents and tool use, reasoning and knowledge, writing and sticking to the facts.
Head to head
Every fact side by side
| Qwen3.5-35B-A3B | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | |
|---|---|---|
| Price per million tokens | $0.16 in · $1.30 out | $2.00 in · $12.00 out |
| Blended (3 in : 1 out) | $0.45 | $4.50 |
| Cheapest host, blended | $0.25 (Darkbloom, FP4) | $4.50 (Google) |
| Cached input, per million | – | $0.20 cached input |
| Intelligence Index | 19.3 | 29.7 |
| Spring Prompt overall | – | 47 |
| Output speed, tokens a second | – | 135 |
| Context window | 262,144 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens |
| Released | 24 Feb 2026 (newer) | 19 Feb 2026 |
| 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
- Gemini 4 Argon review: Opus-level product data at a quarter of the cost, until you ask it to sell 14 Oct 2026
- BulletBench: we made 23 AI models play speed chess, and the clock was the judge 3 Jul 2026
- Claude vs Gemini vs GPT in a 12-Month Marketing Simulation 25 Mar 2026
- The AI Marketing Benchmark That Punishes Plausible-Sounding Strategy 20 Mar 2026
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 | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
|---|---|---|
| Arena (formerly LMArena) reported by Arena (formerly LMArena) · 3 results | ||
| Overall · TextArena rating, higher is better 147 · 15 of 387 measured | 1,394 | 1,487 |
| Overall · Text factualityArena rating, higher is better 129 · 21 of 163 measured | 1,407 | 1,472 |
| Business, management and finance · TextArena rating, higher is better 139 · 23 of 380 measured | 1,403 | 1,477 |
| Artificial Analysis reported by Artificial Analysis · 3 results | ||
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence Indexindex score, higher is better 109 · 53 of 244 measured | 19.3 | 29.7 |
| GPQA Diamond% of questions, higher is better 84 · 5 of 231 measured | 84.5% | 94.1% |
| Humanity's Last Exam% of questions, higher is better 107 · 17 of 243 measured | 21.0% | 47.0% |
| UGI Leaderboard reported by UGI Leaderboard · 3 results | ||
| Writing score · UGIscore out of 100, higher is better 97 · 5 of 230 measured | 42.6think-prefill reasoning | 72.2low reasoning |
| Requested-length error · UGI% off the requested word count, lower is better 83 · 99 of 230 measured | 17.0%no reasoning | 19.0%low reasoning |
| Style adherence · UGIscore from 0 to 1, higher is better 151 · 122 of 230 measured | 0.33no reasoning | 0.34low reasoning |
| Vectara Hallucination Leaderboard reported by Vectara Hallucination Leaderboard · 2 results | ||
| Hallucination rate · Vectara% of summaries, lower is better 62 · 61 of 104 measured | 10.5% | 10.4% |
| Answer rate · Vectara% of documents, higher is better 31 · 55 of 104 measured | 99.8% | 99.4% |
Show all 22 results (11 more)
| Measure | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
|---|---|---|
| Arena (formerly LMArena) reported by Arena (formerly LMArena) · 4 results | ||
| Creative writing · TextArena rating, higher is better 163 · 10 of 385 measured | 1,342 | 1,480 |
| Expert prompts · TextArena rating, higher is better 134 · 26 of 338 measured | 1,419 | 1,509 |
| Instruction following · TextArena rating, higher is better 140 · 17 of 387 measured | 1,386 | 1,480 |
| Writing, literature and language · TextArena rating, higher is better 155 · 11 of 386 measured | 1,363 | 1,480 |
| Artificial Analysis reported by Artificial Analysis · 7 results | ||
| Terminal-Bench 2.1% of tasks, higher is better 72 · 35 of 130 measured | 40.8%no reasoning | 73.8% |
| τ-bench banking% of tasks, higher is better 107 · 46 of 121 measured | 4.9%no reasoning | 21.4% |
| Artificial Analysis Coding Indexindex score, higher is better 79 · 30 of 131 measured | 37.0no reasoning | 68.8 |
| IFBench% of instructions, higher is better 39 · 13 of 195 measured | 72.5% | 77.1% |
| Long-context reasoning (AA-LCR)% of questions, higher is better 100 · 24 of 234 measured | 72.0% | 82.0% |
| Terminal-Bench Hard% of tasks, higher is better 74 · 8 of 190 measured | 26.5% | 53.8% |
| τ²-bench telecom% of tasks, higher is better 45 · 16 of 193 measured | 89.2% | 95.6% |
Compare them with other models
Quick answers
Is Qwen3.5-35B-A3B better than Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview?
Pick Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview if quality matters most: it scores higher (Intelligence Index 29.7 against 19.3). Pick Qwen3.5-35B-A3B if cost matters more: it costs 10 times less per token.
Which is cheaper, Qwen3.5-35B-A3B or Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview?
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B is cheaper: $0.45 against $4.50 per million tokens, 10 times less.
Which is better for agents and tool use, Qwen3.5-35B-A3B or Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview?
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview ranks 62 of 166 models on sale for multi-step tasks with tools: support desks, coding agents, function calls, against 117 for Qwen3.5-35B-A3B.
Which is better for reasoning and knowledge, Qwen3.5-35B-A3B or Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview?
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview ranks 26 of 200 models on sale for hard questions across science, maths and general knowledge, against 94 for Qwen3.5-35B-A3B.
Which is better for writing, Qwen3.5-35B-A3B or Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview?
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview ranks 9 of 189 models on sale for what people prefer in blind comparisons, and judged writing quality, against 109 for Qwen3.5-35B-A3B.
Which is better for sticking to the facts, Qwen3.5-35B-A3B or Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview?
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview ranks 35 of 153 models on sale for summarising without inventing things, and factual answers, against 112 for Qwen3.5-35B-A3B.
Which has the bigger context window, Qwen3.5-35B-A3B or Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview?
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 1,048,576 tokens, against 262,144 for Qwen3.5-35B-A3B.
Run Qwen3.5-35B-A3B and Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview on your own prompt
Benchmarks aren't your data. Try both side by side in the playground, with the cost of every answer.