Gemini 3.5 Flash (High) vs Qwen3.7 Plus
Which is better for the money: Gemini 3.5 Flash (High) by Google or Qwen3.7 Plus 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
Gemini 3.5 Flash (High) scores 7.4 points higher (32.6 vs 25.2) but costs 9.9× as much to run the benchmark ($4222 vs $428; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Gemini 3.5 Flash (High) when you need intelligence above 25.2, and Qwen3.7 Plus when 25.2 is enough.
| Metric | Gemini 3.5 Flash (High) | Qwen3.7 Plus | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 32.6 | 25.2 | −22.7% Qwen3.7 Plus is 22.7% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $4,222.12 | $427.73 | −89.9% Qwen3.7 Plus is 89.9% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 16.46s | 46.21s | +180.7% Qwen3.7 Plus is 180.7% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $1.50 / $9.00 | $0.40 / $1.60 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Speech, Video | Text, Image, Video |
Qwen3.7 Plus vs Gemini 3.5 Flash (High): 22.7% less intelligence, 89.9% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 180.7% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Gemini 3.5 Flash (High) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) scores 56.00 for $4057.
- Qwen3.7 Plus is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Medium) scores 47.80 for $361.
Gemini 3.5 Flash (High)Qwen3.7 PlusToday's Pareto frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/gemini-3-5-flash/qwen3-7-plus · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gemini-3-5-flash/qwen3-7-plus?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill