Gemini 3.7 Flash (medium) vs HyperNova 60B 2605
Which is better for the money: Gemini 3.7 Flash (medium) by Google or HyperNova 60B 2605 by Multiverse Computing? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-08-31.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Gemini 3.7 Flash (medium) scores 35.1 points higher (53.4 vs 18.3) but costs 7.4× as much to run the benchmark ($278 vs $37.5; mid-range vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Gemini 3.7 Flash (medium) when you need intelligence above 18.3, and HyperNova 60B 2605 when 18.3 is enough.
| Metric | Gemini 3.7 Flash (medium) | HyperNova 60B 2605 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 53.4 | 18.3 | −65.7% HyperNova 60B 2605 is 65.7% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $277.50 | $37.50 | −86.5% HyperNova 60B 2605 is 86.5% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 8.44s | 8.10s | −4.0% HyperNova 60B 2605 is 4.0% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.75 / $3.75 | $0.04 / $0.14 | |
| Input modalities | Not reported | Not reported |
HyperNova 60B 2605 vs Gemini 3.7 Flash (medium): 65.7% less intelligence, 86.5% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 4.0% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Gemini 3.7 Flash (medium) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GLM-5.3-Flash scores 57.50 for $138.
- HyperNova 60B 2605 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-5.6 Luna (medium) scores 38.90 for $21.5.
Gemini 3.7 Flash (medium)HyperNova 60B 2605Today'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-3-7-flash-medium/hypernova-60b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gemini-3-7-flash-medium/hypernova-60b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill