Price Per TokenPrice Per Token
Google
Google
vs
Qwen
Qwen

Gemini 2.5 Flash Image (Nano Banana) vs Qwen3.5 397B A17B

A detailed comparison of pricing, benchmarks, and capabilities

Get our weekly newsletter on pricing changes, new releases, and tools.

Join the Price Per Token Community

Key Takeaways

Gemini 2.5 Flash Image (Nano Banana) wins:

  • Cheaper input tokens

Qwen3.5 397B A17B wins:

  • Cheaper output tokens
  • Larger context window
  • Faster response time
  • Higher intelligence benchmark
  • Better at coding
Price Advantage
Gemini 2.5 Flash Image (Nano Banana)
Benchmark Advantage
Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Context Window
Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Speed
Qwen3.5 397B A17B

Pricing Comparison

Benchmark Comparison

Context & Performance

Capabilities

Feature Comparison

FeatureGemini 2.5 Flash Image (Nano Banana)Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Vision (Image Input)
Tool/Function Calls
Reasoning Mode
Audio Input
Audio Output
PDF Input
Prompt Caching
Web Search

License & Release

PropertyGemini 2.5 Flash Image (Nano Banana)Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LicenseProprietaryOpen Source
AuthorGoogleQwen
ReleasedOct 2025Feb 2026

Gemini 2.5 Flash Image (Nano Banana) Modalities

Input
imagetext
Output
imagetext

Qwen3.5 397B A17B Modalities

Input
textimagevideo
Output
text

Frequently Asked Questions

Gemini 2.5 Flash Image (Nano Banana) has cheaper input pricing at $0.30/M tokens. Qwen3.5 397B A17B has cheaper output pricing at $0.90/M tokens.
Gemini 2.5 Flash Image (Nano Banana) has a 32,768 token context window, while Qwen3.5 397B A17B has a 262,144 token context window.
Gemini 2.5 Flash Image (Nano Banana) supports vision. Qwen3.5 397B A17B supports vision.