Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Qwen3.6 27B (Reasoning)
Which is better for the money: Gemini 2.5 Pro by Google or Qwen3.6 27B (Reasoning) by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Qwen3.6 27B (Reasoning) scores 5.3 points higher (21.4 vs 16.1) but costs 1.4× as much to run the benchmark ($1145 vs $823; both premium class). Pick Qwen3.6 27B (Reasoning) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Gemini 2.5 Pro.
| Metric | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen3.6 27B (Reasoning) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 16.1 | 21.4 | +32.9% Qwen3.6 27B (Reasonin… is 32.9% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $822.85 | $1,145.36 | +39.2% Qwen3.6 27B (Reasonin… is 39.2% more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 27.37s | 111.39s | +307.0% Qwen3.6 27B (Reasonin… is 307.0% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $1.25 / $10.0 | $0.60 / $3.60 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Speech, Video | Text, Image, Video |
Qwen3.6 27B (Reasoning) vs Gemini 2.5 Pro: 32.9% more intelligence, 39.2% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 307.0% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Gemini 2.5 Pro is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.
- Qwen3.6 27B (Reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
Gemini 2.5 ProQwen3.6 27B (Reasoning)Today's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/gemini-2-5-pro/qwen3-6-27b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gemini-2-5-pro/qwen3-6-27b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill