Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507

Gemini 2.5 Pro leads Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 16.1 to 12.7, and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 costs 2.9x less per output token ($3.50 vs $10.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 43 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace Gemini 2.5 Pro Replace Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
Gemini 2.5 ProGoogle
Coding
19.1
Overall
41.8
Output $/M
$10.00
41
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Qwen
Coding
No data
Overall
52.9
Output $/M
$3.50
2
vs boards won of 43 shared

Gemini 2.5 Pro or Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507: which to pick

Only Gemini 2.5 Pro has a coding score, 19.1 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 for output tokens 2.9x cheaper ($3.50 vs $10.00 per million) and work measured by LMArena Text: expert or OTIS Mock AIME, where it leads.

Model AGemini 2.5 ProGoogle19.1/1003 independent benchmarks$0.64 per solved taskModel BQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507QwenNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved task
Shared results
43
Gemini 2.5 Pro only
47
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 only
3
Like-for-like categories
8 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 Pro 19.1 from 3 benchmarks, Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Web design, 19.6 points apart on average over 6 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Design Arena: data viz: Gemini 2.5 Pro 1222 against Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 950, 34.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Gemini 2.5 Pro $10.00 against Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 $3.50 per million output tokens, 2.9x apart.
Context window
Gemini 2.5 Pro takes 1.05M tokens, Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 128K.

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 ProBarsQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Ties
Coding40
Intelligence10
Agentic work20
Reasoning31
Math21
Knowledge40
Web design60
General190
All shared boards412
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index40
Coding benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
SWE-bench Verified53.6%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena WebDev1226Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
AA Coding Index33.322.1Gemini 2.5 Pro
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)54.4%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)0.4%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)80.1%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
SciCode46.3%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)26.5%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
Terminal-Bench32.6%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
GSO-Bench3.9%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
WeirdML54.0%41.0%Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: coding14521424Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: software and IT14591431Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena WebDev: HTML1235Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena WebDev: from an image1285Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
Neither model has a result on the other 24 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
AA Intelligence Index16.112.7Gemini 2.5 Pro
Epoch Capabilities Index145.1Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Agentic work benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
AA Agentic Index1.61.3Gemini 2.5 Pro
τ²-Bench Telecom54.1%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
GDPval23.3%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
DeepResearch Bench41.5%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
Vending-Bench 2$574-$11Gemini 2.5 Pro
BrowseComp-Plus29.5%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index31
Reasoning benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)84.4%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)22.5%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)85.3%80.1%Gemini 2.5 Pro
ARC-AGI41.0%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
ARC-AGI-24.9%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured9.0%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14551416Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: expert14521463Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14531432Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Vision: diagrams1274Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena Vision: homework1281Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark70.3%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index21
Math benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
AA Math Index87.7Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)87.7%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
OTIS Mock AIME84.7%86.7%Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 324.6%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
FrontierMath, tier 40.0%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena Text: math14501412Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: mathematical work14541435Gemini 2.5 Pro
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Knowledge benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
CaseLaw (Vals AI)63.9%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)60.8%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)68.9%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
MedCode (Vals AI)50.6%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)86.2%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
SimpleQA VerifiedNot measured40.4%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: science14801433Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14761456Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: legal and government14801415Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: business and finance14391413Gemini 2.5 Pro
FACTS Benchmark Suite61.5%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index60
Web design benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
Design Arena: websites11671052Gemini 2.5 Pro
Design Arena: UI components1137942Gemini 2.5 Pro
Design Arena: game dev1111956Gemini 2.5 Pro
Design Arena: data viz1222950Gemini 2.5 Pro
Design Arena: 3D1080997Gemini 2.5 Pro
Design Arena: all code categories11521032Gemini 2.5 Pro
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index190
General benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
SAGE (Vals AI)41.9%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)73.5%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
IFBench48.7%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)69.0%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
DTBench82.4%80.3%Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMCA34.8%29.3%Gemini 2.5 Pro
Fiction.LiveBenchNot measured75.0%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)83.8%82.4%Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text14581415Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: instruction following14371386Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: creative writing14541384Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Vision1263Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena Text: English14581429Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: non-English14521397Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: Chinese15071481Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: German14871408Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: Japanese14611386Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: Korean14341375Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: French1473Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena Text: Spanish14741389Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: Russian14611401Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: Polish14791390Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: multi-turn14531406Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: longer queries14491400Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: writing and language14541388Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14411370Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Vision: English1261Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena Vision: Chinese1300Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena Vision: reading text1270Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena Vision: humor1262Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena Vision: captioning1304Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing things1283Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing1265Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena Document1421Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
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 Pro$0.0063Fits in one request
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507$0.0022Fits in one request

Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Gemini 2.5 Pro$0.092Fits in one request
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507$0.033Fits in one request

Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Gemini 2.5 Pro$0.350Fits in one request
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507$0.125Exceeds the context window

Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 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 Pro and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
SpecificationGoogle Gemini 2.5 ProQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
MakerGoogleQwen
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedJune 17, 2025July 25, 2025
Context window1.05M128K
Input $/Mtok$1.25$0.45
Output $/Mtok$10.00$3.50
Coding index19.1Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it30
Cost per solved task$0.64Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Gemini 2.5 Pro better than Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 for coding?

Only Gemini 2.5 Pro has a coding score, 19.1 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 for output tokens 2.9x cheaper ($3.50 vs $10.00 per million) and work measured by LMArena Text: expert or OTIS Mock AIME, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Pro or Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507?

Gemini 2.5 Pro costs $1.25 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 costs $0.45 and $3.50. Cost per solved task is known for Gemini 2.5 Pro only.

Which has the bigger context window, Gemini 2.5 Pro or Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507?

Gemini 2.5 Pro, with 1.05M tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks is the Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 comparison based on?

43 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Gemini 2.5 Pro's coding index rests on 3 independent benchmarks and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next