Gemini 3.5 Flash vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Gemini 3.5 Flash 
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next Verdict
- Gemini 3.5 Flash (medium) leads on quality: 64.2 vs 61.6.
- Gemini 3.5 Flash (medium) is stronger in agents & tools, composite, human preference, instruction following, knowledge, maths, multimodal, reasoning.
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is stronger in coding, long context.
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is 15× cheaper ($0.230 vs $3.38 per 1M blended).
- Gemini 3.5 Flash (medium) streams 3.6× faster (201 vs 55 tokens per second).
| Metric | Gemini 3.5 Flash (medium) | Qwen3.8-Flash-Next |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 64.2 | 61.6 |
| Agents & tools score | 67.9 | 65.8 |
| Coding score | 58.7 | 71.2 |
| Composite score | 71.6 | 67.4 |
| Human preference score | 67.4 | – |
| Instruction following score | 72.7 | – |
| Knowledge score | 74.1 | 59.6 |
| Long context score | 63.5 | 66.3 |
| Maths score | 67.2 | – |
| Multimodal score | 67.5 | 64.3 |
| Reasoning score | 64.2 | 63.4 |
| Blended price $/M | $3.38 | $0.230 |
| Output speed | 201 tok/s | 55 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 13.9 s | 39.0 s |
| Context window | 1.0M | 256k |
| LMArena Text | 1474 | – |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1493 | – |
| LMArena Coding | 1502 | – |
| LMArena WebDev | 1492 | 1635 |
| LMArena Vision | 1307 | – |
| LMArena Agent | – | -0.1 |
| LiveBench | – | 76.2% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | – | 87.4% |
| LiveBench Coding | – | 72.5% |
| LiveBench Agentic Coding | – | 61.6% |
| LiveBench Mathematics | – | 85.8% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | – | 74.2% |
| LiveBench Language | – | 74.6% |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | – | 77.1% |
| AA Intelligence Index | 33.6 | 39.9 |
| IFBench | 74.6% | – |
| AA-LCR | 74.3% | 79.7% |
| MMMU-Pro | 83.9% | 79.8% |
| AA-Omniscience | 20.8 | -9.7 |
| Terminal-Bench Hard | 39.4% | – |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | 92.1% | 92.3% |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | 41.3% | 38.0% |
| SciCode (AA) | – | 50.6% |
| τ²-Bench Telecom (AA) | 95.6% | – |
| CritPt | 10.9% | 11.1% |
| GDPval (AA) | – | 57.4% |
| τ²-Bench Banking (AA) | – | 45.4% |
| LMArena Maths | 1478 | – |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1466 | – |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1463 | – |
| LMArena Multi-turn | 1476 | – |
| LMArena Longer Queries | 1478 | – |
| LMArena Document | 1461 | – |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 58.1% | – |
| DeepSWE | 37.4% | – |
| GDP.pdf | 14.0% | – |
Data as of 2026-09-19. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
Gemini 3.5 Flash vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next: questions
- Is Gemini 3.5 Flash better than Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?
- Gemini 3.5 Flash (medium) leads on quality: 64.2 vs 61.6. The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; Gemini 3.5 Flash (medium) is ahead overall as of 2026-09-19, but check the category scores for your use.
- Is Gemini 3.5 Flash better than Qwen3.8-Flash-Next for coding?
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next scores higher in coding (71 vs 59 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Is Gemini 3.5 Flash better than Qwen3.8-Flash-Next for agentic tasks?
- Gemini 3.5 Flash scores higher in agentic tasks (68 vs 66 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.5 Flash or Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is cheaper: $0.230 against $3.38 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token.
- Which is faster, Gemini 3.5 Flash or Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?
- Gemini 3.5 Flash streams faster: 201 against 55 output tokens per second.
- Which has the larger context window?
- Gemini 3.5 Flash accepts more context: 1.0M against 256k tokens.