Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Qwen3 Coder Next
Which is better for the money: Gemini 2.5 Pro by Google or Qwen3 Coder Next by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-09-01.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Gemini 2.5 Pro scores 4.6 points higher (25.9 vs 21.3) but costs 2.4× as much to run the benchmark ($611 vs $250; premium vs mid-range cost classes). Pick Gemini 2.5 Pro when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Qwen3 Coder Next.
| Metric | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen3 Coder Next | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 25.9 | 21.3 | −17.8% Qwen3 Coder Next is 17.8% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $610.51 | $250.18 | −59.0% Qwen3 Coder Next is 59.0% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 25.79s | 4.61s | −82.1% Qwen3 Coder Next is 82.1% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $1.25 / $10.0 | $0.35 / $1.20 | |
| Input modalities | Not reported | Not reported |
Qwen3 Coder Next vs Gemini 2.5 Pro: 17.8% less intelligence, 59.0% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 82.1% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Gemini 2.5 Pro is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GLM-5.3-Flash scores 57.50 for $138.
- Qwen3 Coder Next is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GLM-5.3-Flash scores 57.50 for $138.
Gemini 2.5 ProQwen3 Coder NextToday'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-coder-next · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gemini-2-5-pro/qwen3-coder-next?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill