Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite vs Qwen3.5 9b
Compare Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite and Qwen3.5 9b 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 9b 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.
Upload an image
Drag and drop an image here, or click to browse
Models in this comparison
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite vs Qwen3.5 9b: Overview
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.
Qwen3.5-9B is a 9-billion-parameter multimodal foundation model developed by Alibaba Cloud's Qwen team, released on March 2, 2026 as part of the Qwen3.5 model family. Designed for efficient multimodal reasoning and long-context language tasks, it notably outperforms the older Qwen3-30B, a model more than three times its size, on key benchmarks including GPQA Diamond, IFEval, and LongBench.
The model supports vision-language inputs through an early-fusion multimodal architecture built on a dense hybrid foundation of Gated Delta Networks and Gated Attention. It can also operate in a text-only mode by skipping the vision encoder during inference. It provides a 262,144-token context window (extensible to ~1M tokens via YaRN) and is released under the Apache License 2.0. Within the current AI landscape, Qwen3.5-9B offers a strong balance of capability and efficiency, making it well-suited for multimodal assistants, document analysis, long-context reasoning, and developer-deployed agentic systems.
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite vs Qwen3.5 9b Comparison Table
| Property | Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite | Qwen3.5 9b |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | Qwen | |
| Category | closed | open |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Mar 2026 | Mar 2026 |
| Context Window | 1.0M | 262K |
| Parameters | 9B | |
| License | Proprietary | Apache 2.0 |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $0.250 | $0.100 |
| Output $/1M | $1.50 | $0.150 |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | Demo |
| Object Detection | Demo | |
| OCR | Demo | Demo |
| Vision Language | ||
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | Demo |
| Classification | Demo | |
| 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 Time | 1.86s | 8.99s |
| Median input tokensincl. image tokens | 1.1K | |
| Median output tokens | 6 | |
| Est. cost / taskon this benchmark | $0.0003 | |
| Defect Detection | 73.3%(11/15) | 86.7%(13/15) |
| Document Understanding | 77.8%(7/9) | 66.7%(6/9) |
| Object Counting | 30%(3/10) | 30%(3/10) |
| Object Understanding | 64.3%(9/14) | 71.4%(10/14) |
| Spatial Understanding | 84.2%(16/19) | 84.2%(16/19) |
| OCR | ||
| Overall Score | 89.96% | |
| Avg Response Time | 1.32s | |
| Median input tokensincl. image tokens | 1.1K | |
| Median output tokens | 10 | |
| Est. cost / taskon this benchmark | $0.0003 | |
| Focused Scene OCR | 91.9%(91/99) | |
| Handwritten Math | 80%(8/10) | |
| License Plate Recognition | 100%(30/30) | |
| Text Recognition | 90%(27/30) | |
| VQA & Extraction | 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