Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite vs Qwen3.6 35B A3B
Qwen3.6 35B A3B leads Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 18.2 to 10.4, and Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite costs 2.5x less per output token ($0.40 vs $1.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 10 benchmarks have a result for both.
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite or Qwen3.6 35B A3B: which to pick
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite for output tokens 2.5x cheaper ($0.40 vs $1.00 per million) and a larger context window (1.05M against 262K tokens).
- Shared results
- 10
- Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite only
- 20
- Qwen3.6 35B A3B only
- 10
- Like-for-like categories
- 5 of 9
Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.
Which one for your work
Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Qwen3.6 35B A3B
Qwen3.6 35B A3B leads, 18.2 against 10.4.
Same board, both measured
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
No call
Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B has a AA Agentic Index result, 13.1.
Directional only
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
No call
Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite has a GPQA Diamond result, 70.2%.
Directional only
Math
AIME
No call
Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite has a AIME result, 42.1%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
No call
Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite has a MMLU Pro result, 79.1%.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite takes 1.05M tokens against 262K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite $0.0003, Qwen3.6 35B A3B $0.0006 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite not benchmarked, Qwen3.6 35B A3B not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- Agentic work, 76.3 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- τ²-Bench Telecom: Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite 19.0% against Qwen3.6 35B A3B 95.3%, 76.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite $0.40 against Qwen3.6 35B A3B $1.00 per million output tokens, 2.5x apart.
- Context window
- Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite takes 1.05M tokens, Qwen3.6 35B A3B 262K.
Benchmark by benchmark
First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.
| Category | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Bars | Qwen3.6 35B A3B | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 0 | 1 | ||
| Intelligence | 0 | 2 | ||
| Agentic work | 0 | 1 | ||
| Reasoning | 0 | 2 | ||
| General | 0 | 4 | ||
| All shared boards | 0 | 10 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index01
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.6 35B A3B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Coding Index | Not measured | 41.9 | Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | 71.4% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 59.3% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| SciCode | Not measured | 36.6% | Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 4.5% | 34.8% | Qwen3.6 35B A3B |
| Terminal-Bench | Not measured | 24.6% | Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B measured |
| WeirdML | Not measured | 34.5% | Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 32 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.6 35B A3B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 10.4 | 18.2 | Qwen3.6 35B A3B |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 133.8 | 143.7 | Qwen3.6 35B A3B |
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.6 35B A3B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | Not measured | 13.1 | Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 19.0% | 95.3% | Qwen3.6 35B A3B |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) | 36.9% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.6 35B A3B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 70.2% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| MMMU Pro (Vals AI) | 75.4% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 62.5% | 84.1% | Qwen3.6 35B A3B |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 6.8% | 22.2% | Qwen3.6 35B A3B |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | Not measured | 84.8% | Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B measured |
| Mystery game puzzles | Not measured | 22.0% | Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B measured |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 40.5% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.6 35B A3B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME | 42.1% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| MGSM (Vals AI) | 89.5% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| AA Math Index | 53.3 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | 53.3% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| OTIS Mock AIME | Not measured | 86.7% | Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B measured |
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | Not measured | 20.4% | Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.6 35B A3B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | 79.1% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | 82.0% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | 57.6% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | 66.2% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| MortgageTax (Vals AI) | 57.6% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| MedQA (Vals AI) | 88.9% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| MedCode (Vals AI) | 34.2% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 75.9% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here | |||
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.6 35B A3B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 9 boards here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.6 35B A3B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| SAGE (Vals AI) | 30.8% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | 75.8% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| IFBench | 49.9% | 64.4% | Qwen3.6 35B A3B |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 55.7% | 71.7% | Qwen3.6 35B A3B |
| DTBench | 62.8% | 73.9% | Qwen3.6 35B A3B |
| LMCA | 18.1% | 29.7% | Qwen3.6 35B A3B |
| Surface Evolver Bench | Not measured | 44.4% | Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.6 35B A3B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 5 boards here | |||
What each workload costs
Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.
Chat turn
1K input + 500 output tokens
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite costs less
Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.
Specification differences
The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.
| Specification | Google Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.6 35B A3B |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Qwen | |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | July 22, 2025 | April 27, 2026 |
| Context window | 1.05M | 262K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.10 | $0.10 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.40 | $1.00 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite better than Qwen3.6 35B A3B for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite for output tokens 2.5x cheaper ($0.40 vs $1.00 per million) and a larger context window (1.05M against 262K tokens).
Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite or Qwen3.6 35B A3B?
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite costs $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 35B A3B costs $0.10 and $1.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite or Qwen3.6 35B A3B?
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks is the Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite vs Qwen3.6 35B A3B comparison based on?
10 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen3.6 35B A3B's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.