Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite vs Qwen3.5-9B

Qwen3.5-9B costs 10.0x less per output token than Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite ($0.15 vs $1.50 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 12 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Replace Qwen3.5-9B
Gemini 3.1 Flash LiteGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.50
10
Qwen3.5-9BQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.15
1
vs boards won of 12 shared, 1 tied

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite or Qwen3.5-9B: which to pick

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

Pick Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite for a larger context window (1.05M against 262K tokens) and work measured by τ²-Bench Telecom, where it leads.

Model AGemini 3.1 Flash LiteGoogleNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BQwen3.5-9BQwenNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved task
Shared results
12
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite only
4
Qwen3.5-9B only
3
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.

At a glance

Coding index
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite not benchmarked, Qwen3.5-9B not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 55.6 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite 31.3% against Qwen3.5-9B 86.8%, 55.6 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite $1.50 against Qwen3.5-9B $0.15 per million output tokens, 10.0x apart.
Context window
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite takes 1.05M tokens, Qwen3.5-9B 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 3.1 Flash LiteBarsQwen3.5-9BTies
Coding101 tie
Intelligence10
Agentic work01
Reasoning30
Math10
General40
All shared boards1011 tie
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index10
Coding benchmarks for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash LiteQwen3.5-9BLeader
AA Coding IndexNot measured23.5Only Qwen3.5-9B measured
SciCode43.4%29.5%Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)24.2%24.2%Tie
Terminal-BenchNot measured9.2%Only Qwen3.5-9B measured
WeirdML52.2%Not measuredOnly Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured
Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash LiteQwen3.5-9BLeader
AA Intelligence IndexNot measured13.3Only Qwen3.5-9B measured
Epoch Capabilities Index144.3139.3Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash LiteQwen3.5-9BLeader
τ²-Bench Telecom31.3%86.8%Qwen3.5-9B
DeepResearch Bench37.3%Not measuredOnly Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured
Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
Reasoning benchmarks for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash LiteQwen3.5-9BLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)82.2%80.6%Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)17.2%14.9%Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)81.8%79.0%Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
Kagi LLM Benchmark67.2%Not measuredOnly Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured
Neither model has a result on the other 18 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Math benchmarks for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash LiteQwen3.5-9BLeader
OTIS Mock AIME80.0%61.7%Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 327.7%Not measuredOnly Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
KnowledgeNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash LiteQwen3.5-9BLeader
Neither model has a result on 18 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash LiteQwen3.5-9BLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
General benchmarks for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash LiteQwen3.5-9BLeader
IFBench77.2%66.7%Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)74.3%70.0%Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
DTBench76.8%71.2%Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
LMCA35.0%24.5%Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
Neither model has a result on the other 42 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash LiteQwen3.5-9BLeader
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 3.1 Flash Lite$0.0010Fits in one request
Qwen3.5-9B$0.0002Fits in one request

Qwen3.5-9B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite$0.017Fits in one request
Qwen3.5-9B$0.0054Fits in one request

Qwen3.5-9B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite$0.065Fits in one request
Qwen3.5-9B$0.021Fits in one request

Qwen3.5-9B 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 3.1 Flash Lite and Qwen3.5-9B
SpecificationGoogle Gemini 3.1 Flash LiteQwen3.5-9B
MakerGoogleQwen
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedMay 7, 2026March 10, 2026
Context window1.05M262K
Input $/Mtok$0.25$0.10
Output $/Mtok$1.50$0.15
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite better than Qwen3.5-9B for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite for a larger context window (1.05M against 262K tokens) and work measured by τ²-Bench Telecom, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite or Qwen3.5-9B?

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite costs $0.25 per million input tokens and $1.50 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5-9B costs $0.10 and $0.15. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite or Qwen3.5-9B?

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks is the Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite vs Qwen3.5-9B comparison based on?

12 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen3.5-9B's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next