whichllmmodel
Back to Dashboard
Alibaba Cloud (Qwen)

Qwen3.6-Flash

VS
Google

Gemini 3.1 Pro

✍️ Analysis by:the whichllmmodel Editorial Team|📅 Updated: June 2026

Decision Recommendation

⚖️ Editorial Verdict: In our analysis, Gemini 3.1 Pro is the premium intelligence choice, scoring 54.2% higher on coding benchmarks. However, this accuracy premium comes with a cost overhead: Qwen3.6-Flash is 8.0x cheaper to run and delivers 1.2x faster throughput. If you are building high-volume, simple chatbots or processing massive amounts of text where budget is critical, Qwen3.6-Flash offers excellent cost savings. For agentic reasoning, code refactoring, or complex logical tasks, the accuracy premium of Gemini 3.1 Pro fully justifies the cost.

Model Specs

Qwen3.6-Flash

Benchmarks & Scores

Coding (swe-bench-pro)
N/A
Reasoning (gpqa-diamond)
85.5%

Cost & Performance

Cost (per 1M tokens)8.0x cheaper
$0.56Input: $0.25 | Output: $1.50
Speed1.2x faster
128 tps
Context Window
1M tokens
Model Specs

Gemini 3.1 Pro

Benchmarks & Scores

Coding (swe-bench-pro)Winner (+)
54.2%
Reasoning (gpqa-diamond)Winner (+8.8%)
94.3%

Cost & Performance

Cost (per 1M tokens)
$4.50Input: $2.00 | Output: $12.00
Speed
109 tps
Context Window
1M tokens
Read our data collection methodology

Frequently Asked Questions

Qwen3.6-Flash is cheaper than Gemini 3.1 Pro. Qwen3.6-Flash has a blended cost of $0.56/1M tokens, which is about 8.0x cheaper than Gemini 3.1 Pro at $4.50/1M tokens.

Qwen3.6-Flash is faster than Gemini 3.1 Pro. Qwen3.6-Flash generates 128 tokens per second (tps) compared to Gemini 3.1 Pro which generates 109 tokens per second.

Gemini 3.1 Pro is better for coding tasks. It scores 54.2% on coding evaluations (swe-bench-pro) compared to Qwen3.6-Flash which scores N/A.

Want to customize weights or add more models?

Open our interactive dashboard where you can adjust your priority levels for speed, budget, or accuracy slider-bars and watch model rankings calculate dynamically.

Customize in Interactive Dashboard