Skip to content

Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch) vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B

Signal-by-Signal Comparison
SignalGemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch)DeltaQwen3.5-122B-A10B
Capabilities
100
+17
83
Benchmarks
75
-3
78
Pricing
99
+1
98
Context window size
96
+10
86
Recency
100
--
100
Output Capacity
80
-2
82
Overall Result
3 wins
of 6
2 wins
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch) wins 3 of 6 signals

Score History

Score History (25 data points)
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch)Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch)

76.9

current score

Leader

Qwen3.5-122B-A10B

right now

Qwen3.5-122B-A10B

77.7

current score

LMMarketCap.com
Interactive Price Comparison
100Kcalls/month
1,000tokens (~1,333 chars)
500tokens (~667 chars)

Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch)

Google

Best Value
Per request$0.000775
Daily$2.58
Monthly$77.50
Annual$930.00

Qwen3.5-122B-A10B

Alibaba

Per request$0.001490
Daily$4.97
Monthly$149.00
Annual$1788.00

Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch) saves you $71.50/month

That's $858.00/year compared to Qwen3.5-122B-A10B at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.

48% cheaper
Choose Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch) for cost optimization

Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch) pricing:
Input:$0.15/M tokens
Output:$1.25/M tokens
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B pricing:
Input:$0.29/M tokens
Output:$2.40/M tokens
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch)

Google

77

Composite Score

Winner
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B

Alibaba

78

Composite Score

Signal-by-Signal Comparison
MetricGemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch)Qwen3.5-122B-A10BWinner
Overall Score
77
78
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Rank#113#109
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Quality Rank#113#109
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Adoption Rank#113#109
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Parameters--122B--
Context Window1049K262K
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch)
Pricing$0.15/$1.25/M$0.29/$2.40/M--
Signal Scores
Capabilities
100
83
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch)
Benchmarks
75
78
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Pricing
99
98
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch)
Context window size
96
86
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch)
Recency
100
100
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch)
Output Capacity
80
82
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Benchmark Head-to-Head(2 benchmarks)
Gemini 3.5: 1Qwen3.5-122B-A10B: 0
Gemini 3.5
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Normalized 0-100%
MMLU-Pro
-86.7%
Arena Elo
14591417
Benchmark Interpretation

Our score (0-100) is driven by benchmark performance (90%) from Arena Elo ratings, MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations. Capabilities and context window serve as tiebreakers (10%). Learn more about our methodology.

Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch)Strong Performer

Scores 77/100 (rank #113), placing it in the top 61% of all 290 models tracked.

Raw Quality0/100
Cost Efficiency0/100
Speed0/100
Qwen3.5-122B-A10BStrong Performer

Scores 78/100 (rank #109), placing it in the top 63% of all 290 models tracked.

Raw Quality0/100
Cost Efficiency0/100
Speed0/100

With only a 1-point gap, these models are in the same performance tier. The practical difference in output quality is minimal - your choice should depend on pricing, latency requirements, and specific feature needs.

When to Use Each Model

Choose Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch) when you need:

  • High-volume production workloads where API costs must be minimized
  • Processing long documents or large codebases (1049K token context)
  • Step-by-step reasoning and chain-of-thought problem solving

Choose Qwen3.5-122B-A10B when you need:

  • Step-by-step reasoning and chain-of-thought problem solving
  • Self-hosted deployments where you need full control over the model
Cost-Performance Analysis
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch)Best Value
Input cost$0.15/M tokens
Output cost$1.25/M tokens
Cost per quality point$0.018
Est. monthly (1M tokens/day)$21.00
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Input cost$0.29/M tokens
Output cost$2.40/M tokens
Cost per quality point$0.035
Est. monthly (1M tokens/day)$40.35

Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch) offers 48% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $21.00/month with Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch) vs $40.35/month with Qwen3.5-122B-A10B - a $19.35 monthly difference.

Latency & Speed
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch)Faster
Speed score0/100
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Speed score0/100

Both models have comparable response speeds. For most applications, the latency difference is negligible.

When latency matters most: Interactive chatbots, IDE code completion, real-time translation, and user-facing applications where response time directly impacts experience. For batch processing, background summarization, or offline analysis, latency is less critical.

Example Use Cases

Code generation & review

Based on overall model capabilities and architecture for coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring

Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch)

Customer support chatbot

Suitable for user-facing chat with competitive response times. Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch) also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support

Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch)

Long document analysis

Larger context window (1049K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass

Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch)

Batch data extraction

Lower output pricing ($1.25/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily

Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch)

Creative writing & content

Higher overall composite score (78/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content

Qwen3.5-122B-A10B

Image understanding & OCR

Supports vision input - can analyze screenshots, diagrams, photos, and scanned documents directly

Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch)
Which Should You Choose?
Our recommendation:
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B

Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch) and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B are extremely close in overall performance (only 0.7999999999999972 points apart). Your best choice depends entirely on which specific strengths matter most for your use case.

by Google

  • Choose for Quality - Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
  • Choose for Cost - 48% lower pricing; better value at scale
  • Choose for Reliability - Higher uptime and faster response speeds
  • Choose for Prototyping - Stronger community support and better developer experience
  • Choose for Production - Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale

by Alibaba

Consider for specialized use cases.

Capability Comparison
CapabilityGemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch)Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Vision (Image Input)
Function Calling
Streaming
JSON Mode
Reasoning
Web Searchdiffers
Image Output
Monthly Cost Calculator
1,000tokens (600 in / 400 out)
100requests/day (3,000/month)

Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch)

Google

Best Value
$1.77
estimated monthly cost

Qwen3.5-122B-A10B

Alibaba

$3.40
estimated monthly cost

Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch) saves you $1.63/month

That's 48% cheaper than Qwen3.5-122B-A10B at 1,000 tokens/request and 100 requests/day.

Assumes 60% input / 40% output token ratio per request. Actual costs may vary based on your usage pattern.

Parameters & Context
ParameterGemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch)Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Context Window1.0M262K
Max Output Tokens65,53681,920
Open SourceNoYes
CreatedJul 21, 2026Feb 25, 2026
Last updated: 3m ago

相关对比

Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch) vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B (2026) | LM Market Cap