Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 vs Qwen3.6 27B
Qwen3.6 27B costs 3.7x less per output token than Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 ($2.70 vs $10.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 3 benchmarks have a result for both.
Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 or Qwen3.6 27B: which to pick
Only Qwen3.6 27B has a coding score, 36.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 for a larger context window (1.05M against 262K tokens).
- Shared results
- 3
- Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 only
- 12
- Qwen3.6 27B only
- 21
- Like-for-like categories
- 1 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
Only Qwen3.6 27B has a coding score, so no call is made.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
No call
Only Qwen3.6 27B has a AA Intelligence Index result, 21.4.
Directional only
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
No call
Only Qwen3.6 27B has a AA Agentic Index result, 18.5.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05
Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 takes 1.05M tokens against 262K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen3.6 27B
Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 $0.0063, Qwen3.6 27B $0.0018 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
No call
Only Qwen3.6 27B has the number, $1.30.
Directional only
At a glance
- Coding index
- Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 not benchmarked, Qwen3.6 27B 36.8 from 2 benchmarks.
- Widest category
- Reasoning, 1.6 points apart on average over 3 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run): Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 19.9% against Qwen3.6 27B 23.1%, 3.2 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 $10.00 against Qwen3.6 27B $2.70 per million output tokens, 3.7x apart.
- Context window
- Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 takes 1.05M tokens, Qwen3.6 27B 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 Pro Preview 06-05 | Bars | Qwen3.6 27B | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reasoning | 0 | 3 | ||
| All shared boards | 0 | 3 |
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index10 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aider polyglot | 83.1% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 measured |
| AA Coding Index | Not measured | 53.7 | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | 79.2% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 measured |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | Not measured | 70.0% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 11.9% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 77.8% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 measured |
| SciCode | Not measured | 42.8% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 34.8% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| GSO-Bench | 3.9% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 measured |
| SciCode | 7.7% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 29 boards here | |||
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | Not measured | 21.4 | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | Not measured | 146.2 | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | Not measured | 18.5 | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | Not measured | 94.2% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| METR time horizons | 55.4% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 measured |
| Remote Labor Index | 0.8% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 measured |
| DeepResearch Bench | 42.8% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 36 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index03
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 83.6% | 84.2% | Qwen3.6 27B |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 19.9% | 23.1% | Qwen3.6 27B |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 84.8% | 85.9% | Qwen3.6 27B |
| SimpleBench | 62.4% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 measured |
| Mystery game puzzles | Not measured | 7.0% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| VPCT | 46.4% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME | Not measured | 91.1% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | Not measured | 35.1% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| CaseLaw (Vals AI) | Not measured | 53.2% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | Not measured | 62.3% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | Not measured | 71.3% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| MortgageTax (Vals AI) | Not measured | 68.3% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 85.8% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here | |||
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 9 boards here | |||
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| SAGE (Vals AI) | Not measured | 45.6% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| IFBench | Not measured | 67.6% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | Not measured | 77.3% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| DTBench | Not measured | 78.1% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| LMCA | Not measured | 34.5% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 91.7% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 40 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 | Qwen3.6 27B | 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
Qwen3.6 27B costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Qwen3.6 27B costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Qwen3.6 27B 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 Pro Preview 06-05 | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Qwen | |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | June 5, 2025 | April 27, 2026 |
| Context window | 1.05M | 262K |
| Input $/Mtok | $1.25 | $0.45 |
| Output $/Mtok | $10.00 | $2.70 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | 36.8 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 2 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | $1.30 |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 better than Qwen3.6 27B for coding?
Only Qwen3.6 27B has a coding score, 36.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 for a larger context window (1.05M against 262K tokens).
Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 or Qwen3.6 27B?
Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 costs $1.25 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 27B costs $0.45 and $2.70. Cost per solved task is known for Qwen3.6 27B only.
Which has the bigger context window, Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 or Qwen3.6 27B?
Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks is the Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 vs Qwen3.6 27B comparison based on?
3 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen3.6 27B's on 2. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.