Gemini 3.8 Flash vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
Gemini 3.8 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 38.9. Qwen3.5-397B-A17B is 1.1x 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 38.9, ranking #15 overall.
On price, Qwen3.5-397B-A17B is roughly 1.1x 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 coding — 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 Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- cost matters — it's about 1.1x cheaper per token
- you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune
At a glance
The differences that matter most.
Capability indexes
Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks
Individual benchmarks
13 reported for Gemini 3.8 Flash · 38 for Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
Gemini 3.8 Flash and Qwen3.5-397B-A17Bdon'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
For input processing, Gemini 3.8 Flash ($0.75/1M tokens) is 1.3x more expensive than Qwen3.5-397B-A17B ($0.60/1M tokens).
For output processing, Gemini 3.8 Flash ($3.75/1M tokens) is 1.0x more expensive than Qwen3.5-397B-A17B ($3.60/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Gemini 3.8 Flash is more expensive than Qwen3.5-397B-A17B.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
Gemini 3.8 Flash accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to Qwen3.5-397B-A17B's 262,144 tokens. Gemini 3.8 Flash can generate longer responses up to 65,536 tokens, while Qwen3.5-397B-A17B is limited to 64,000 tokens.
Input capabilities
Documented input modalities across available providers
Both Gemini 3.8 Flash and Qwen3.5-397B-A17B support multimodal inputs.
They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.
Gemini 3.8 Flash
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
License
Usage and distribution terms
Gemini 3.8 Flash is licensed under a proprietary license, while Qwen3.5-397B-A17B uses Apache 2.0.
License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.
Proprietary
Closed source
Apache 2.0
Open weights
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
Gemini 3.8 Flash was released on 2026-09-02, while Qwen3.5-397B-A17B was released on 2026-02-16.
Gemini 3.8 Flash is 7 months newer than Qwen3.5-397B-A17B.
Sep 2, 2026
4 days ago
6mo newerFeb 16, 2026
6 months ago
Knowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Gemini 3.8 Flash has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2026-03-31, while Qwen3.5-397B-A17B'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 Qwen3.5-397B-A17B's cutoff date.
Mar 2026
—
Provider Availability
Gemini 3.8 Flash is available from Google. Qwen3.5-397B-A17B is available from Novita.
Gemini 3.8 Flash
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against Gemini 3.8 Flash and Qwen3.5-397B-A17B side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about Gemini 3.8 Flash vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B.