Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Qwen3.5 27B
Wins 1 of 7 areas
Facts
Wins 6 of 7 areas
Coding · Agents · Reasoning · Images and charts · Long documents · Following instructions
Qwen3.5 27B is the stronger all-rounder.Gemini 2.5 Pro is better at facts.
Scores updated · 37 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the seven 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.
- Images and chartsUnderstanding pictures, charts and video14Qwen3.5 27B4 of 6 tests · 1 tie
- CodingWriting and fixing software13Qwen3.5 27B3 of 4 tests
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own02Qwen3.5 27B2 of 2 tests
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts02Qwen3.5 27B2 of 2 tests
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked02Qwen3.5 27B2 of 2 tests
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking12Qwen3.5 27B2 of 3 tests
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up21Gemini 2.5 Pro2 of 3 tests
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.
Qwen3.5 27B costs 76% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The three tests each model wins by the widest margin. Scores are out of 100.
Where Qwen3.5 27B pulls ahead
- Finds hard-to-locate facts by browsing the webBrowseComp+51.1points ahead
- Follows unfamiliar, precisely checkable instructionsIFBench+26.9points ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+9.4points ahead
Where Gemini 2.5 Pro pulls ahead
- Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+18.4points ahead
- Code for real scientific research problemsSciCode+6.8points ahead
- Research-level physics problemsCritPt+1.7points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 37 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingQwen3.5 27B
- LMArena · WebDevQwen3.5 27B by 133 rating points12241357+133 rating
- SWE-bench VerifiedQwen3.5 27B by 9.263.272.4+9.2
- SciCodeGemini 2.5 Pro by 6.846.339.5+6.8
- Terminal-Bench HardQwen3.5 27B by 6.126.532.6+6.1
AgentsQwen3.5 27B
- BrowseCompQwen3.5 27B by 51.19.961+51.1
- GDPValQwen3.5 27B by 33033+33
ReasoningQwen3.5 27B
- Humanity's Last ExamQwen3.5 27B by 5.91823.9+5.9
- GPQA DiamondQwen3.5 27B by 2.283.685.8+2.2
- CritPtGemini 2.5 Pro by 1.72.60.9+1.7
FactsGemini 2.5 Pro
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyGemini 2.5 Pro by 18.43920.7+18.4
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationQwen3.5 27B by 9.49.118.5+9.4
- Vectara HHEM hallucination ratelower is betterGemini 2.5 Pro by 5.1712.1+5.1
Images and chartsQwen3.5 27B
Long documentsQwen3.5 27B
- AA-LCRQwen3.5 27B by 8.76977.7+8.7
- LongBench v2Qwen3.5 27B by 1.858.860.6+1.8
Following instructionsQwen3.5 27B
- IFBenchQwen3.5 27B by 26.948.775.6+26.9
- Multi-ChallengeQwen3.5 27B by 7.253.660.8+7.2
Other results15 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 Agentic IndexQwen3.5 27B by 51.13.554.6+51.1
- τ²-Bench Telecom (AA run)Qwen3.5 27B by 39.854.193.9+39.8
- BrowseComp-ZHQwen3.5 27B by 29.932.262.1+29.9
- AA-OmniscienceGemini 2.5 Pro by 27.7-16.4-44+27.7
- HMMT 2025Qwen3.5 27B by 24.165.789.8+24.1
- MATH-VisionQwen3.5 27B by 12.773.386+12.7
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexGemini 2.5 Pro by 11.846.734.9+11.8
- HMMT Feb. 2025Qwen3.5 27B by 11.280.892+11.2
- HMMT Nov. 2025Qwen3.5 27B by 9.88089.8+9.8
- AA IntelligenceQwen3.5 27B by 7.91522.9+7.9
- vectara_factual_consistencyGemini 2.5 Pro by 5.19387.9+5.1
- VideoMMMUGemini 2.5 Pro by 1.383.682.3+1.3
- vectara_avg_summary_lengthGemini 2.5 Pro by 12 rating points106.494.4+12 rating
- vectara_answer_ratetie99.199.8tie
- MMLU-Protie8686.1tie
Questions people ask
Which is better, Gemini 2.5 Pro or Qwen3.5 27B?
Qwen3.5 27B wins six of the seven areas where both have results: coding, agents, reasoning, images and charts, long documents and following instructions. Gemini 2.5 Pro wins facts.
Which is better for coding?
Qwen3.5 27B. It wins 3 of the 4 coding tests both models report; Gemini 2.5 Pro wins 1.
Which is cheaper?
Gemini 2.5 Pro costs $1.25 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5 27B costs $0.30 and $2.40. That makes Qwen3.5 27B about 76% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 37 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 22 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 15 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.