Gemini 3.1 Pro vs Qwen3.5 27B
Wins 7 of 8 areas
Coding · Reasoning · Facts · Images and charts · Math · Long documents · Following instructions
Wins 0 of 8 areas
—
Gemini 3.1 Pro is the stronger all-rounder.Qwen3.5 27B is cheaper.
Both rank among the ten best models we track in images and charts.
Scores updated · 53 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the eight areas we test. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- CodingWriting and fixing software70Gemini 3.1 Pro7 of 7 tests
- Images and chartsUnderstanding pictures, charts and video40Gemini 3.1 Pro4 of 4 tests
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking30Gemini 3.1 Pro3 of 3 tests
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up30Gemini 3.1 Pro3 of 3 tests
- MathCompetition and research-level math30Gemini 3.1 Pro3 of 3 tests
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked20Gemini 3.1 Pro2 of 2 tests
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts10Gemini 3.1 Pro1 of 1 test
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own22Even2 each · 1 tie
Long documents rests on a single test.
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 81% 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 3.1 Pro pulls ahead
- Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+34.2points ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+30.6points ahead
- Finds hard-to-locate facts by browsing the webBrowseComp+24.9points ahead
Where Qwen3.5 27B pulls ahead
- Real work tasks from 44 professionsGDPVal+18.3points ahead
- Finds the root cause of IT system incidentsAA IT-Bench SRE+5.2points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 53 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingGemini 3.1 Pro
- Terminal-Bench HardGemini 3.1 Pro by 21.253.832.6+21.2
- SciCodeGemini 3.1 Pro by 19.258.739.5+19.2
- LiveCodeBench v6Gemini 3.1 Pro by 1191.780.7+11
- LMArena · WebDevGemini 3.1 Pro by 90 rating points14471357+90 rating
- SWE-bench VerifiedGemini 3.1 Pro by 8.280.672.4+8.2
- SWE-bench MultilingualGemini 3.1 Pro by 7.676.969.3+7.6
- SWE-bench ProGemini 3.1 Pro by 354.251.2+3
AgentsEven
- BrowseCompGemini 3.1 Pro by 24.985.961+24.9
- OSWorld-VerifiedGemini 3.1 Pro by 2076.256.2+20
- GDPValQwen3.5 27B by 18.314.733+18.3
- AA IT-Bench SREQwen3.5 27B by 5.230.335.5+5.2
- MCP Atlastie69.268.4tie
ReasoningGemini 3.1 Pro
- Humanity's Last ExamGemini 3.1 Pro by 23.14723.9+23.1
- CritPtGemini 3.1 Pro by 16.817.70.9+16.8
- GPQA DiamondGemini 3.1 Pro by 8.394.185.8+8.3
FactsGemini 3.1 Pro
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyGemini 3.1 Pro by 34.254.920.7+34.2
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationGemini 3.1 Pro by 30.649.118.5+30.6
- Vectara HHEM hallucination ratelower is betterGemini 3.1 Pro by 1.710.412.1+1.7
Images and chartsGemini 3.1 Pro
- MMMU-ProGemini 3.1 Pro by 7.482.475+7.4
- LMArena · VisionGemini 3.1 Pro by 56 rating points12961240+56 rating
- CharXiv (RQ)Gemini 3.1 Pro by 3.883.379.5+3.8
- MathVistaGemini 3.1 Pro by 2.490.287.8+2.4
MathGemini 3.1 Pro
- HMMT Feb. 2026Gemini 3.1 Pro by 13.694.781.1+13.6
- AIME 2026Gemini 3.1 Pro by 6.698.391.7+6.6
- IMOAnswerBenchGemini 3.1 Pro by 1.18179.9+1.1
Following instructionsGemini 3.1 Pro
- Multi-ChallengeGemini 3.1 Pro by 10.671.460.8+10.6
- IFBenchGemini 3.1 Pro by 1.577.175.6+1.5
Other results25 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 3.1 Pro by 75.931.9-44+75.9
- AA Agentic IndexQwen3.5 27B by 44.310.354.6+44.3
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexGemini 3.1 Pro by 33.968.834.9+33.9
- Terminal-Bench 2.0Gemini 3.1 Pro by 26.968.541.6+26.9
- t2-benchGemini 3.1 Pro by 20.399.379+20.3
- MCPMarkGemini 3.1 Pro by 19.655.936.3+19.6
- Tool-DecathlonGemini 3.1 Pro by 17.348.831.5+17.3
- DynaMathQwen3.5 27B by 15.672.187.7+15.6
- SimpleVQAGemini 3.1 Pro by 13.969.956+13.9
- ERQAGemini 3.1 Pro by 10.370.860.5+10.3
- BabyVisionGemini 3.1 Pro by 9.854.444.6+9.8
- LVBenchQwen3.5 27B by 7.466.273.6+7.4
- AA IntelligenceGemini 3.1 Pro by 6.829.722.9+6.8
- MMMLUGemini 3.1 Pro by 6.792.685.9+6.7
- NL2RepoGemini 3.1 Pro by 6.133.427.3+6.1
- HMMT Nov. 2025Gemini 3.1 Pro by 594.889.8+5
- MMLU-ProGemini 3.1 Pro by 4.99186.1+4.9
- MATH-VisionGemini 3.1 Pro by 3.889.886+3.8
- RealWorldQAGemini 3.1 Pro by 1.785.483.7+1.7
- vectara_factual_consistencyGemini 3.1 Pro by 1.789.687.9+1.7
- τ²-Bench Telecom (AA run)Gemini 3.1 Pro by 1.795.693.9+1.7
- vectara_avg_summary_lengthGemini 3.1 Pro by 13.3 rating points107.794.4+13.3 rating
- τ³-BenchQwen3.5 27B by 1.367.168.4+1.3
- vectara_answer_ratetie99.499.8tie
- EmbSpatial-Benchtie84.284.5tie
Questions people ask
Which is better, Gemini 3.1 Pro or Qwen3.5 27B?
Gemini 3.1 Pro wins seven of the eight areas we test: coding, reasoning, facts, images and charts, math, long documents and following instructions. Qwen3.5 27B wins none, but costs 81% less. They are level on agents.
Which is better for coding?
Gemini 3.1 Pro. It wins 7 of the 7 coding tests both models report; Qwen3.5 27B wins none.
Which is cheaper?
Gemini 3.1 Pro costs $2.00 per million input tokens and $12.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5 27B costs $0.30 and $2.40. That makes Qwen3.5 27B about 81% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 53 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 28 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 25 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.