Price Per TokenPrice Per Token
Google
Google
vs
Qwen
Qwen

Gemini 2.5 Flash vs Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto)

A detailed comparison of pricing, benchmarks, and capabilities

OpenClaw

Deploy OpenClaw in Under 1 Minute We handle hosting, scaling, and maintenance

114 out of our 303 tracked models have had a price change in February.

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

Key Takeaways

Gemini 2.5 Flash wins:

  • Larger context window
  • Faster response time
  • Better at math
  • Supports vision
  • Has reasoning mode

Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto) wins:

  • Cheaper input tokens
  • Cheaper output tokens
  • Higher intelligence benchmark
  • Better at coding
Price Advantage
Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto)
Benchmark Advantage
Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto)
Context Window
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Speed
Gemini 2.5 Flash

Pricing Comparison

Price Comparison

MetricGemini 2.5 FlashQwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto)Winner
Input (per 1M tokens)$0.30$0.22 Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto)
Output (per 1M tokens)$2.50$1.00 Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto)
Cache Read (per 1M)$0.03$0.02 Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto)
Cache Write (per 1M)$0.08N/A Gemini 2.5 Flash
Using a 3:1 input/output ratio, Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto) is 51% cheaper overall.

Gemini 2.5 Flash Providers

Vercel $0.30 (Cheapest)
Google AI Studio $0.30 (Cheapest)
Google $0.30 (Cheapest)

Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto) Providers

DeepInfra $0.22 (Cheapest)
Google $0.22 (Cheapest)
SiliconFlow $0.25
Novita $0.30
Vercel $0.40

Benchmark Comparison

8
Benchmarks Compared
4
Gemini 2.5 Flash Wins
3
Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto) Wins

Benchmark Scores

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashQwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto)Winner
Intelligence Index
Overall intelligence score
21.124.8
Coding Index
Code generation & understanding
17.824.6
Math Index
Mathematical reasoning
60.339.3
MMLU Pro
Academic knowledge
80.978.8
GPQA
Graduate-level science
68.361.8
LiveCodeBench
Competitive programming
49.558.5
Aider
Real-world code editing
55.1--
AIME
Competition math
50.047.7
Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto) significantly outperforms in coding benchmarks.

Cost vs Quality

X-axis:
Y-axis:
Loading chart...
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Other models

Context & Performance

Context Window

Gemini 2.5 Flash
1,048,576
tokens
Max output: 65,535 tokens
Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto)
262,144
tokens
Gemini 2.5 Flash has a 75% larger context window.

Speed Performance

MetricGemini 2.5 FlashQwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto)Winner
Tokens/second246.2 tok/s39.3 tok/s
Time to First Token0.47s1.63s
Gemini 2.5 Flash responds 527% faster on average.

Capabilities

Feature Comparison

FeatureGemini 2.5 FlashQwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto)
Vision (Image Input)
Tool/Function Calls
Reasoning Mode
Audio Input
Audio Output
PDF Input
Prompt Caching
Web Search

License & Release

PropertyGemini 2.5 FlashQwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto)
LicenseProprietaryOpen Source
AuthorGoogleQwen
ReleasedJun 2025Jul 2025

Gemini 2.5 Flash Modalities

Input
fileimagetextaudiovideo
Output
text

Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto) Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

Related Comparisons

Compare Gemini 2.5 Flash with:

Compare Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto) with:

Frequently Asked Questions

Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto) has cheaper input pricing at $0.22/M tokens. Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto) has cheaper output pricing at $1.00/M tokens.
Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto) scores higher on coding benchmarks with a score of 24.6, compared to Gemini 2.5 Flash's score of 17.8.
Gemini 2.5 Flash has a 1,048,576 token context window, while Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto) has a 262,144 token context window.
Gemini 2.5 Flash supports vision. Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto) does not support vision.