Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Qwen 3.5 397B
Side-by-side benchmark comparison across coding, math, reasoning, speed, and pricing.
Gemini 2.5 Pro by Google wins on 12 of 18 benchmarks against Qwen 3.5 397B by Qwen, which leads on 6. This head-to-head comparison covers coding, math, reasoning, speed, and pricing metrics from our benchmark data.
Category-by-Category Breakdown
General Intelligence: In general intelligence, Gemini 2.5 Pro scores 1465 on Chatbot Arena ELO compared to Qwen 3.5 397B's 1350, while Gemini 2.5 Pro scores 84.0% on MMLU-Pro compared to Qwen 3.5 397B's 81.0%, while Qwen 3.5 397B scores 19.1 on AA Intelligence Index compared to Gemini 2.5 Pro's 16.7.
Coding: In coding, Gemini 2.5 Pro scores 89.0% on HumanEval+ compared to Qwen 3.5 397B's 88.0%, while Qwen 3.5 397B scores 76.4% on SWE-bench Verified compared to Gemini 2.5 Pro's 63.8%, while Gemini 2.5 Pro scores 58.0% on LiveCodeBench compared to Qwen 3.5 397B's 54.0%, while Qwen 3.5 397B scores 48.2 on AA Coding Index compared to Gemini 2.5 Pro's 33.3.
Math: In math, Gemini 2.5 Pro scores 88.0% on MATH compared to Qwen 3.5 397B's 87.0%, while Gemini 2.5 Pro scores 95.5% on GSM8K compared to Qwen 3.5 397B's 95.0%.
Reasoning: In reasoning, Gemini 2.5 Pro scores 84.0% on GPQA Diamond compared to Qwen 3.5 397B's 62.0%, while Gemini 2.5 Pro scores 48.0% on ARC-AGI compared to Qwen 3.5 397B's 45.0%, while Qwen 3.5 397B scores 10.6 on AA Agentic Index compared to Gemini 2.5 Pro's 3.5.
Context: In context, Gemini 2.5 Pro scores 1.0M on Context Length compared to Qwen 3.5 397B's 262K.
Pricing Comparison
Gemini 2.5 Pro costs $1.3/1M input tokens and $10.0/1M output tokens, while Qwen 3.5 397B costs $0.55/1M input and $3.5/1M output. Qwen 3.5 397B is the more affordable option for API usage.
Speed Comparison
Gemini 2.5 Pro generates output at 55 tok/s compared to Qwen 3.5 397B's 45 tok/s, and the time to first token is 500 ms for Gemini 2.5 Pro versus 600 ms for Qwen 3.5 397B. Gemini 2.5 Pro delivers faster throughput.
Verdict
For developers prioritizing general intelligence and math and speed, Gemini 2.5 Pro has the edge. For those who value coding and affordability, Qwen 3.5 397B is the stronger choice.
View Individual Model Pages
Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Qwen 3.5 397B — FAQ
Which is better, Gemini 2.5 Pro or Qwen 3.5 397B?
Gemini 2.5 Pro wins on more benchmarks overall (12 vs 6). However, the best choice depends on your specific needs — each model excels in different areas.
How does Gemini 2.5 Pro compare to Qwen 3.5 397B for coding?
Qwen 3.5 397B is better for coding, scoring 76.4% on SWE-bench Verified compared to 63.8%. SWE-bench tests real-world software engineering by resolving actual GitHub issues.
Is Gemini 2.5 Pro cheaper than Qwen 3.5 397B?
Yes, Qwen 3.5 397B is cheaper. Gemini 2.5 Pro costs $1.3/1M input and $10.0/1M output tokens. Qwen 3.5 397B costs $0.55/1M input and $3.5/1M output tokens.
Which is faster, Gemini 2.5 Pro or Qwen 3.5 397B?
Gemini 2.5 Pro is faster, generating output at 55 tok/s compared to 45 tok/s. Faster output speed means shorter wait times for API responses.
What benchmarks does the Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Qwen 3.5 397B comparison cover?
This comparison covers 18 benchmarks including Chatbot Arena ELO, MMLU-Pro, HumanEval+, MATH, GPQA Diamond, SWE-bench Verified, Output Speed, LiveCodeBench, and more. Metrics span general intelligence, coding, math, reasoning, speed, and cost categories.