Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Gemini 2.5 Flash vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B

Qwen3.5-122B-A10B leads Gemini 2.5 Flash on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 17.7 to 15.5, and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B costs 1.2x less per output token ($2.08 vs $2.50 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 45 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace Gemini 2.5 Flash Replace Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Gemini 2.5 FlashGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
34.3
Output $/M
$2.50
15
Qwen3.5-122B-A10BQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$2.08
30
vs boards won of 45 shared

Gemini 2.5 Flash or Qwen3.5-122B-A10B: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Gemini 2.5 Flash for a larger context window (1.05M against 262K tokens) and work measured by Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) or LMArena Text: coding, where it leads.

Model AGemini 2.5 FlashGoogleNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmark$0.466 per solved taskModel BQwen3.5-122B-A10BQwenNot benchmarked1 independent benchmarkNo cost per solved task
Shared results
45
Gemini 2.5 Flash only
28
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B only
6
Like-for-like categories
7 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.

At a glance

Coding index
Gemini 2.5 Flash not benchmarked, Qwen3.5-122B-A10B not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 62.0 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: Gemini 2.5 Flash 31.6% against Qwen3.5-122B-A10B 93.6%, 62.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Gemini 2.5 Flash $2.50 against Qwen3.5-122B-A10B $2.08 per million output tokens, 1.2x apart.
Context window
Gemini 2.5 Flash takes 1.05M tokens, Qwen3.5-122B-A10B 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.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryGemini 2.5 FlashBarsQwen3.5-122B-A10BTies
Coding03
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
Reasoning16
Math02
Knowledge31
General1116
All shared boards1530
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index03
Coding benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashQwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
SWE-bench Verified28.7%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
LMArena WebDevNot measured1361Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
AA Coding IndexNot measured43.3Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)69.5%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
SciCodeNot measured39.7%Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)13.6%31.1%Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Terminal-Bench17.1%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: coding14231436Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: software and IT14251436Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1353Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1351Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 28 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashQwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
AA Intelligence Index15.517.7Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Epoch Capabilities Index142.9Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashQwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
τ²-Bench Telecom31.6%93.6%Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BALROG33.5%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
Vending-Bench 2$549Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)56.2%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
BrowseComp-Plus39.9%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 36 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index16
Reasoning benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashQwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)79.0%85.7%Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)12.1%25.2%Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
ARC-AGI33.3%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
ARC-AGI-22.5%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
SimpleBench41.2%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured17.0%Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14221421Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Text: expert14261431Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14201431Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Vision: diagrams12451249Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Vision: homework12441261Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Kagi LLM Benchmark56.8%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Math benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashQwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
AA Math Index73.3Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)73.3%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: math14111431Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: mathematical work14221431Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index31
Knowledge benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashQwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
MedCode (Vals AI)40.4%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)83.2%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: science14331432Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14281423Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Text: legal and government14301422Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Text: business and finance14041414Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
FACTS Benchmark Suite47.2%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashQwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
Design Arena: websites1074Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
Design Arena: UI components1003Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
Design Arena: game dev1004Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
Design Arena: data viz1060Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
Design Arena: 3D1020Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
Design Arena: all code categories1058Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
Design Arena: SVG1020Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1116
General benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashQwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
SAGE (Vals AI)44.8%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)83.0%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
IFBench50.3%75.7%Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)65.3%76.3%Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
DTBench76.5%84.3%Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMCA27.5%32.2%Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text14171417Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: instruction following14051399Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Text: creative writing14001368Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Vision12351244Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: English14181428Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: non-English14091401Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Text: Chinese14491463Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: German14171425Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: Japanese13961367Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Text: Korean13851353Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Text: French14321443Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: Spanish14221425Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: Russian14151400Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Text: Polish14131398Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Text: multi-turn14081416Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: longer queries14191410Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Text: writing and language14051387Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13931366Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Vision: English12391249Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Vision: Chinese12841301Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Vision: reading text12371251Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Vision: humor12251243Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Vision: captioning1277Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing things1252Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing12411220Gemini 2.5 Flash
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashQwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
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$0.0015Fits in one request
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B$0.0013Fits in one request

Qwen3.5-122B-A10B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Gemini 2.5 Flash$0.022Fits in one request
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B$0.019Fits in one request

Qwen3.5-122B-A10B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Gemini 2.5 Flash$0.085Fits in one request
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B$0.073Fits in one request

Qwen3.5-122B-A10B 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.

Specifications of Gemini 2.5 Flash and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
SpecificationGoogle Gemini 2.5 FlashQwen3.5-122B-A10B
MakerGoogleQwen
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedJune 17, 2025February 25, 2026
Context window1.05M262K
Input $/Mtok$0.30$0.26
Output $/Mtok$2.50$2.08
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it01
Cost per solved task$0.466Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Gemini 2.5 Flash better than Qwen3.5-122B-A10B for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Gemini 2.5 Flash for a larger context window (1.05M against 262K tokens) and work measured by Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) or LMArena Text: coding, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Flash or Qwen3.5-122B-A10B?

Gemini 2.5 Flash costs $0.30 per million input tokens and $2.50 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5-122B-A10B costs $0.26 and $2.08. Cost per solved task is known for Gemini 2.5 Flash only.

Which has the bigger context window, Gemini 2.5 Flash or Qwen3.5-122B-A10B?

Gemini 2.5 Flash, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks is the Gemini 2.5 Flash vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B comparison based on?

45 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Gemini 2.5 Flash's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next