Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Qwen3.6 35B A3B
Qwen3.6 35B A3B leads Gemini 2.5 Pro on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 18.2 to 16.1, and Qwen3.6 35B A3B costs 10.0x less per output token ($1.00 vs $10.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 18 benchmarks have a result for both.
Gemini 2.5 Pro or Qwen3.6 35B A3B: which to pick
Only Gemini 2.5 Pro has a coding score, 19.1 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3.6 35B A3B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Qwen3.6 35B A3B for output tokens 10.0x cheaper ($1.00 vs $10.00 per million) and work measured by AA Coding Index or Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.
- Shared results
- 18
- Gemini 2.5 Pro only
- 72
- Qwen3.6 35B A3B only
- 2
- Like-for-like categories
- 6 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 Gemini 2.5 Pro has a coding score, so no call is made.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Qwen3.6 35B A3B
Qwen3.6 35B A3B leads, 18.2 against 16.1.
Same board, both measured
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
Qwen3.6 35B A3B
Qwen3.6 35B A3B leads, 13.1 against 1.6.
Same board, both measured
Web design
Design Arena: websites
No call
Only Gemini 2.5 Pro has a Design Arena: websites result, 1167.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Gemini 2.5 Pro
Gemini 2.5 Pro takes 1.05M tokens against 262K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen3.6 35B A3B
Gemini 2.5 Pro $0.0063, Qwen3.6 35B A3B $0.0006 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
No call
Only Gemini 2.5 Pro has the number, $0.64.
Directional only
At a glance
- Coding index
- Gemini 2.5 Pro 19.1 from 3 benchmarks, Qwen3.6 35B A3B not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- Agentic work, 26.4 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- τ²-Bench Telecom: Gemini 2.5 Pro 54.1% against Qwen3.6 35B A3B 95.3%, 41.2 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Gemini 2.5 Pro $10.00 against Qwen3.6 35B A3B $1.00 per million output tokens, 10.0x apart.
- Context window
- Gemini 2.5 Pro 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 Pro | Bars | Qwen3.6 35B A3B | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 3 | 2 | ||
| Intelligence | 1 | 1 | ||
| Agentic work | 0 | 2 | ||
| Reasoning | 3 | 0 | ||
| Math | 1 | 1 | ||
| General | 2 | 2 | ||
| All shared boards | 10 | 8 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index32
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen3.6 35B A3B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | 53.6% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| LMArena WebDev | 1226 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| AA Coding Index | 33.3 | 41.9 | Qwen3.6 35B A3B |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | 54.4% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | 0.4% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 80.1% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| SciCode | 46.3% | 36.6% | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 26.5% | 34.8% | Qwen3.6 35B A3B |
| Terminal-Bench | 32.6% | 24.6% | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
| GSO-Bench | 3.9% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| WeirdML | 54.0% | 34.5% | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1452 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1459 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | 1235 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| LMArena WebDev: from an image | 1285 | Not measured | Only 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 index11
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen3.6 35B A3B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 16.1 | 18.2 | Qwen3.6 35B A3B |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 145.1 | 143.7 | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen3.6 35B A3B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | 1.6 | 13.1 | Qwen3.6 35B A3B |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 54.1% | 95.3% | Qwen3.6 35B A3B |
| GDPval | 23.3% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| DeepResearch Bench | 41.5% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| Vending-Bench 2 | $574 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| BrowseComp-Plus | 29.5% | Not measured | Only 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 index30
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen3.6 35B A3B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 84.4% | 84.1% | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 22.5% | 22.2% | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 85.3% | 84.8% | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
| ARC-AGI | 41.0% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 4.9% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| Mystery game puzzles | Not measured | 22.0% | Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1455 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1452 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1453 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| LMArena Vision: diagrams | 1274 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| LMArena Vision: homework | 1281 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 70.3% | Not measured | Only 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 index11
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen3.6 35B A3B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Math Index | 87.7 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | 87.7% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 84.7% | 86.7% | Qwen3.6 35B A3B |
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | 24.6% | 20.4% | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
| FrontierMath, tier 4 | 0.0% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: math | 1450 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | 1454 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen3.6 35B A3B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| CaseLaw (Vals AI) | 63.9% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | 60.8% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| MortgageTax (Vals AI) | 68.9% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| MedCode (Vals AI) | 50.6% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 86.2% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: science | 1480 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1476 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1480 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1439 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| FACTS Benchmark Suite | 61.5% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen3.6 35B A3B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | 1167 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| Design Arena: UI components | 1137 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| Design Arena: game dev | 1111 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| Design Arena: data viz | 1222 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| Design Arena: 3D | 1080 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| Design Arena: all code categories | 1152 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index22
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen3.6 35B A3B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| SAGE (Vals AI) | 41.9% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | 73.5% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| IFBench | 48.7% | 64.4% | Qwen3.6 35B A3B |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 69.0% | 71.7% | Qwen3.6 35B A3B |
| DTBench | 82.4% | 73.9% | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
| LMCA | 34.8% | 29.7% | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
| Creative writing (Lech Mazur) | 83.8% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| Surface Evolver Bench | Not measured | 44.4% | Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B measured |
| LMArena Text | 1458 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1437 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1454 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| LMArena Vision | 1263 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: English | 1458 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1452 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1507 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: German | 1487 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | 1461 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: Korean | 1434 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: French | 1473 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | 1474 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1461 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: Polish | 1479 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1453 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1449 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1454 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1441 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| LMArena Vision: English | 1261 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| LMArena Vision: Chinese | 1300 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| LMArena Vision: reading text | 1270 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| LMArena Vision: humor | 1262 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| LMArena Vision: captioning | 1304 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| LMArena Vision: recognizing things | 1283 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| LMArena Vision: creative writing | 1265 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro measured |
| LMArena Document | 1421 | Not measured | Only 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
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | 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
Qwen3.6 35B A3B costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Qwen3.6 35B A3B costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Qwen3.6 35B A3B 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 | Qwen3.6 35B A3B |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Qwen | |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | June 17, 2025 | April 27, 2026 |
| Context window | 1.05M | 262K |
| Input $/Mtok | $1.25 | $0.10 |
| Output $/Mtok | $10.00 | $1.00 |
| Coding index | 19.1 | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 3 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | $0.64 | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Gemini 2.5 Pro better than Qwen3.6 35B A3B for coding?
Only Gemini 2.5 Pro has a coding score, 19.1 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3.6 35B A3B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Qwen3.6 35B A3B for output tokens 10.0x cheaper ($1.00 vs $10.00 per million) and work measured by AA Coding Index or Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Pro or Qwen3.6 35B A3B?
Gemini 2.5 Pro costs $1.25 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 35B A3B costs $0.10 and $1.00. Cost per solved task is known for Gemini 2.5 Pro only.
Which has the bigger context window, Gemini 2.5 Pro or Qwen3.6 35B A3B?
Gemini 2.5 Pro, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks is the Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Qwen3.6 35B A3B comparison based on?
18 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 Qwen3.6 35B A3B's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.