Apodex 1.1 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash
Wins 1 of 6 areas
Long documents
Wins 5 of 6 areas
Coding · Agents · Reasoning · Facts · Images and charts
Gemini 3.5 Flash is the stronger all-rounder.Apodex 1.1 is cheaper and better at long documents.
Scores updated · 17 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the six areas where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own03Gemini 3.5 Flash3 of 4 tests · 1 tie
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking03Gemini 3.5 Flash3 of 3 tests
- CodingWriting and fixing software02Gemini 3.5 Flash2 of 2 tests
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up02Gemini 3.5 Flash2 of 2 tests
- Images and chartsUnderstanding pictures, charts and video01Gemini 3.5 Flash1 of 1 test
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts10Apodex 1.11 of 1 test
Images and charts and long documents rest on a single test each.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
Apodex 1.1 costs 69% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The tests each model wins by the widest margin, up to three each. Scores are out of 100.
Where Gemini 3.5 Flash pulls ahead
- Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+19.7points ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+16.2points ahead
- Long professional tasks in banking, consulting and lawAA ApexAgents+15.9points ahead
Where Apodex 1.1 pulls ahead
- Reasons across sets of long documentsAA-LCR+6points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 17 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingGemini 3.5 Flash
- Terminal-Bench 2.1Gemini 3.5 Flash by 969.778.7+9
- SciCodeGemini 3.5 Flash by 8.445.553.9+8.4
AgentsGemini 3.5 Flash
- AA ApexAgentsGemini 3.5 Flash by 15.931.247.1+15.9
- τ-Bench V3 · BankingGemini 3.5 Flash by 725.232.2+7
- Terminal-Bench 4.0Gemini 3.5 Flash by 6.606.6+6.6
- GDPValtie34.635.1tie
ReasoningGemini 3.5 Flash
- Humanity's Last ExamGemini 3.5 Flash by 8.634.142.7+8.6
- CritPtGemini 3.5 Flash by 8.54.613.1+8.5
- GPQA DiamondGemini 3.5 Flash by 5.886.492.2+5.8
FactsGemini 3.5 Flash
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyGemini 3.5 Flash by 19.731.751.4+19.7
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationGemini 3.5 Flash by 16.221.637.8+16.2
Images and chartsGemini 3.5 Flash
- MMMU-ProGemini 3.5 Flash by 5.179.284.3+5.1
Other results4 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- AA-OmniscienceGemini 3.5 Flash by 43.1-21.921.2+43.1
- AA Agentic IndexApodex 1.1 by 9.336.627.3+9.3
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexGemini 3.5 Flash by 9.360.870.1+9.3
- AA IntelligenceGemini 3.5 Flash by 6.226.432.6+6.2
Questions people ask
Which is better, Apodex 1.1 or Gemini 3.5 Flash?
Gemini 3.5 Flash wins five of the six areas where both have results: coding, agents, reasoning, facts and images and charts. Apodex 1.1 wins long documents, and costs 69% less.
Which is better for coding?
Gemini 3.5 Flash. It wins 2 of the 2 coding tests both models report; Apodex 1.1 wins none.
Which is cheaper?
Apodex 1.1 costs $0.30 per million input tokens and $3.00 per million output tokens; Gemini 3.5 Flash costs $1.50 and $9.00. That makes Apodex 1.1 about 69% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 17 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 13 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 4 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.