Roboflow

Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite vs Qwen3.5 27B

Compare Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite and Qwen3.5 27B side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, Open Prompt, and OCR.

Compare Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite vs Qwen3.5 27B live

Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.

Extract and compare text from images across multiple models.

Open OCR in the full playground
GoogleGemini 3.1 Flash-Lite
Run to compare this model.
QwenQwen3.5 27B
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite vs Qwen3.5 27B: Overview

Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite

Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite is a natively multimodal reasoning model from Google DeepMind in the Gemini 3 series, based on the Gemini 3 Pro architecture. It processes text, image, video, audio, and PDF inputs within a 1 million token context window and produces text output up to 64K tokens. The model targets high-volume, latency-sensitive workloads and supports visual question answering, image and document data extraction, content moderation, classification, translation, automated speech recognition, and agentic data pipelines. It exposes configurable thinking levels of minimal, low, medium, and high, which set the depth of internal reasoning applied per request and let developers balance response quality against cost and latency.

On benchmarks reported at launch, Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite scores 86.9% on GPQA Diamond and 76.8% on the MMMU Pro multimodal benchmark, and reaches an Elo score of 1432 on the Arena.ai leaderboard. According to Artificial Analysis benchmarks, it produces a 2.5 times faster time to first answer token and a 45% increase in output speed relative to Gemini 2.5 Flash. It also shows improved instruction following, higher audio input quality for automated speech recognition tasks, and support for structured JSON output used in data extraction pipelines.

Qwen3.5 27B

Qwen3.5-27B is a multimodal dense hybrid model developed by Alibaba Cloud’s Qwen team and released in February 2026 as a high-precision entry in the Qwen3.5 "Medium" series. Unlike its Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) siblings, the 27B model utilizes a dense architecture combining Gated Delta Networks with a feed-forward structure, activating its full parameter suite for every inference to maximize reliability. This design provides the highest instruction-following and coding accuracy in its class, with a notable IFEval score of 95.0. The model features a native 262K-token context window, extensible to 1M tokens via YaRN (RoPE scaling), and is released under the Apache-2.0 license.

Optimized for agentic workflows, Qwen3.5-27B employs an early-fusion architecture that treats visual and textual data as a unified stream for deep cross-modal reasoning. This unified approach allows the model to excel in technical analysis and software engineering, matching GPT-5-mini with a 72.4% score on SWE-bench Verified. While the larger MoE variants in the family lead in raw knowledge benchmarks, the 27B model offers a stable and high-density alternative for structured data extraction and spatial perception, contributing to the Qwen3.5 family’s generational leap in OCR accuracy over the previous Qwen3-VL series.

Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite vs Qwen3.5 27B Comparison Table

PropertyGemini 3.1 Flash-LiteQwen3.5 27B
OrganizationGoogleQwen
Categoryclosedopen
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateMar 2026Feb 2026
Context Window1.0M262K
Parameters27B
LicenseProprietaryApache 2.0
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$0.250$0.195
Output $/1M$1.50$1.56
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoDemo
Object DetectionDemo
OCRDemoDemo
Vision Language
Visual Question AnsweringDemoDemo
ClassificationDemo
Document Question Answering
Image Tagging
Multi-Label Classification
Model Features
LLMs with Vision Capabilities
Multimodal Vision
Vision Evalspass/fail results · 67 prompts
Score key:≥75%40–74%<40%
Visual Understanding
Overall Score
68.66%
71.64%
Avg Response Time1.86s1.98s
Median input tokensincl. image tokens1.1K1.2K
Median output tokens67
Est. cost / taskon this benchmark$0.0003$0.0002
Defect Detection
73.3%(11/15)
80%(12/15)
Document Understanding
77.8%(7/9)
77.8%(7/9)
Object Counting
30%(3/10)
40%(4/10)
Object Understanding
64.3%(9/14)
78.6%(11/14)
Spatial Understanding
84.2%(16/19)
73.7%(14/19)
OCR
Overall Score
89.96%
85.59%
Avg Response Time1.32s8.51s
Median input tokensincl. image tokens1.1K126
Median output tokens10107
Est. cost / taskon this benchmark$0.0003$0.0002
Focused Scene OCR
91.9%(91/99)
84.8%(84/99)
Handwritten Math
80%(8/10)
100%(10/10)
License Plate Recognition
100%(30/30)
93.3%(28/30)
Text Recognition
90%(27/30)
80%(24/30)
VQA & Extraction
83.3%(50/60)
83.3%(50/60)

Output tokens (incl. reasoning) and est. cost / task are measured on this benchmark from a single low-temperature run, and shown only for models whose run covered at least 90% of prompts. Methodology