Gemini 3.6 Flash (High) vs Qwen3 Coder Next
Which is better for the money: Gemini 3.6 Flash (High) by Google or Qwen3 Coder Next by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-24.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Gemini 3.6 Flash (High) scores 24.8 points higher (34.0 vs 9.2) but costs 4.0× as much to run the benchmark ($1614 vs $405; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Gemini 3.6 Flash (High) when you need intelligence above 9.2, and Qwen3 Coder Next when 9.2 is enough.
| Metric | Gemini 3.6 Flash (High) | Qwen3 Coder Next | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 34.0 | 9.2 | −72.9% Qwen3 Coder Next is 72.9% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $1,614.42 | $405.10 | −74.9% Qwen3 Coder Next is 74.9% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 17.79s | 6.44s | −63.8% Qwen3 Coder Next is 63.8% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.75 / $3.75 | $0.31 / $1.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Speech, Video | Text |
Qwen3 Coder Next vs Gemini 3.6 Flash (High): 72.9% less intelligence, 74.9% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 63.8% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Gemini 3.6 Flash (High) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
- Qwen3 Coder Next is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Medium) scores 47.80 for $361.
Gemini 3.6 Flash (High)Qwen3 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-3-6-flash/qwen3-coder-next · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gemini-3-6-flash/qwen3-coder-next?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill