The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Gemini 3.8 Flash vs Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507

Gemini 3.8 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 28.1. Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 is 1.5x cheaper per token.

Google · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Gemini 3.8 Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 28.1, ranking #15 overall.

On price, Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 is roughly 1.5x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Gemini 3.8 Flash also accepts a larger context window (1,048,576 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Gemini 3.8 Flash

  • overall performance matters — it scores 51.0 and ranks #15 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and agents — it leads those capability indexes
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,048,576 token context window
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

Choose Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507

  • cost matters — it's about 1.5x cheaper per token
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Gemini 3.8 Flash
Google
Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
51.0
#15
28.1
#127
Reasoning
46.9
#24
28.5
#118
Agents
35.8
#16
11.3
#100
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$0.75 / M
$0.30 / M
Output price
$3.75 / M
$3.00 / M
Context window
1,048,576
262,144

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

2 shared
Index
Gemini 3.8 Flash
Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507
Vision
33.8#15
12.3#100
Tool use
26.7#23
11.3#113
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

13 reported for Gemini 3.8 Flash · 25 for Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507

No common benchmarks found

Gemini 3.8 Flash and Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507don't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 costs less

For input processing, Gemini 3.8 Flash ($0.75/1M tokens) is 2.5x more expensive than Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 ($0.30/1M tokens).

For output processing, Gemini 3.8 Flash ($3.75/1M tokens) is 1.3x more expensive than Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 ($3.00/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Gemini 3.8 Flash is more expensive than Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Fri Sep 04 2026 • llm-stats.com
Google
Gemini 3.8 Flash
Input tokens$0.75
Output tokens$3.75
Best providerGoogle
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507
Input tokens$0.30
Output tokens$3.00
Best providerFireworks
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Gemini 3.8 Flash accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507's 262,144 tokens. Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 can generate longer responses up to 131,072 tokens, while Gemini 3.8 Flash is limited to 65,536 tokens.

Google
Gemini 3.8 Flash
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output65,536 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507
Input262,144 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Fri Sep 04 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Gemini 3.8 Flash supports multimodal inputs, whereas Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 does not.

Gemini 3.8 Flash can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Gemini 3.8 Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Gemini 3.8 Flash is licensed under a proprietary license, while Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 uses Apache 2.0.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Gemini 3.8 Flash

Proprietary

Closed source

Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Gemini 3.8 Flash was released on 2026-09-02, while Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 was released on 2025-07-25.

Gemini 3.8 Flash is 13 months newer than Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507.

Gemini 3.8 Flash

Sep 2, 2026

2 days ago

1.1yr newer
Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507

Jul 25, 2025

1.1 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Gemini 3.8 Flash has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2026-03-31, while Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Gemini 3.8 Flash's training data extends to 2026-03-31, but cannot make a direct comparison without Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507's cutoff date.

Gemini 3.8 Flash

Mar 2026

Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507

—

Provider Availability

Gemini 3.8 Flash is available from Google. Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 is available from Fireworks, Novita.

Gemini 3.8 Flash

google logo
Google
Input Price:Input: $0.75/1MOutput Price:Output: $3.75/1M

Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507

fireworks logo
Fireworks
Input Price:Input: $0.30/1MOutput Price:Output: $3.00/1M
novita logo
Novita
Input Price:Input: $0.30/1MOutput Price:Output: $3.00/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Gemini 3.8 Flash and Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Gemini 3.8 Flash
✓ Preferred
Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Gemini 3.8 Flash vs Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507.

Which is better, Gemini 3.8 Flash or Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507?

Gemini 3.8 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 28.1. Gemini 3.8 Flash is made by Google and Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Gemini 3.8 Flash compare to Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 in benchmarks?

Gemini 3.8 Flash scores Terminal-Bench 2.1: 89.4%, LVBench: 87.1%, CharXiv-R: 86.2%, LABBench2: 86.2%, DeepSWE 1.1: 73.7%. Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 scores MMLU-Redux: 93.8%, AIME 2025: 92.3%, WritingBench: 88.3%, IFEval: 87.8%, Creative Writing v3: 86.1%.

Is Gemini 3.8 Flash cheaper than Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507?

Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 is 2.5x cheaper for input tokens. Gemini 3.8 Flash costs $0.75/M input and $3.75/M output via google. Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 costs $0.30/M input and $3.00/M output via fireworks.

What are the context window sizes for Gemini 3.8 Flash and Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507?

Gemini 3.8 Flash supports 1.0M tokens and Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 supports 262K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Gemini 3.8 Flash and Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (51.0 vs 28.1), context window (1.0M vs 262K), input pricing ($0.75 vs $0.30/M), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Gemini 3.8 Flash and Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507?

Gemini 3.8 Flash is developed by Google and Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.

Related comparisons