Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite vs Qwen3.5 9b
Compare Gemini 3.5 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 3.5 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 3.5 Flash-Lite vs Qwen3.5 9b on Vision Evals
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite scores higher on 3 of the six Vision Evals tasks.
The widest gap is Object Detection, where Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads 57.5% to 45.8%.
Overall, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite averages 70.3% (#23 of 52) against 66.1% (#33 of 52) for Qwen3.5 9b.
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite is both cheaper ($0.0014 vs $0.0016 per sample) and faster (2.7s vs 31.3s per sample).
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite vs Qwen3.5 9b Comparison Table
Evals updated September 3, 2026Pricing updated September 4, 2026
| Property | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3.5 9b |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | Qwen | |
| Category | closed | open |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Jul 2026 | Mar 2026 |
| Context Window | 1.0M | 262K |
| Parameters | 9B | |
| License | Proprietary | Apache 2.0 |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $0.300 | $0.100 |
| Output $/1M | $2.50 | $0.150 |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | Demo |
| Chart Question Answering | ||
| Classification | Demo | |
| Document Question Answering | ||
| Image Tagging | ||
| Multi-Label Classification | ||
| Object Detection | Demo | |
| OCR | Demo | Demo |
| Vision Language | ||
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | Demo |
| Video Classification | ||
| Model Features | ||
| Foundation Vision | ||
| LLMs with Vision Capabilities | ||
| Multimodal Vision | ||
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 6 vision tasks, pooled at low effort | ||
| Overall | 70.3% | 66.1% |
| Quantizationsself-hosted | ||
| Avg cost / sample | $0.0014 | $0.0016 |
| Avg speed / sample | 2.70s | 31.33s |
| By task | ||
| Object Detection | 57.5% | 45.8% |
| Counting | 52.7% | 54.0% |
| Identification | 84.4% | 84.4% |
| OCR | 87.4% | 79.1% |
| Data Extraction | 91.8% | 82.7% |
| Reasoning (low) | 48.3% | 50.3% |
| Reasoning (high) | 68.9% | – |
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite vs Qwen3.5 9b: Overview
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite is a natively multimodal reasoning model developed by Google DeepMind, released on July 21, 2026 as part of the Gemini 3.5 model family. It is the fastest model in the 3.5 series, designed for both low-latency tasks and high-throughput production workloads such as agentic search, document processing, receipt translation, and large-scale data extraction. The model accepts text, images, audio, and video as inputs, with a context window of up to 1 million tokens, and produces text output. It supports configurable thinking levels, allowing developers to tune the balance between response quality, cost, and latency depending on workload requirements.
On agentic and coding benchmarks, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite significantly outperforms its predecessor, Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite, including on Terminal-Bench 2.1 (54% vs. 31%), GDM-MRCR v2 long-context (72.2% vs. 60.1%), and real-world task execution as measured by GDPval-AA v2 (1140 vs. 642). It also surpasses Gemini 3 Flash on SWE-Bench Pro (54.2% vs. 49.6%) and OSWorld-Verified (74.0% vs. 65.1%). According to the Artificial Analysis Index, the model generates output at approximately 350 tokens per second. It is built on the Gemini 3.5 Flash foundation and is evaluated across reasoning, coding, multimodal understanding, multilingual performance, and long-context tasks. The model is developed under Google's Frontier Safety Framework.
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.
Frequently Asked Questions
On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite performed better. It scores higher on 3 of the six vision tasks and averages 70.3% (#23 of 52) against 66.1% (#33 of 52) for Qwen3.5 9b. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.
Yes. On the Vision Evals Object Detection benchmark at low effort, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads with 57.5% against 45.8%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0014 per sample against $0.0016. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 2.7s per inference against 31.3s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.
Yes. The comparison demo on this page runs both models on the same image side by side for image captioning and open prompts in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.