Gemini 3.5 Flash vs Gemini 4 Argon
Compare Gemini 3.5 Flash and Gemini 4 Argon side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Open Prompt, Image Captioning, OCR, Classification, and Object Detection.
Compare Gemini 3.5 Flash vs Gemini 4 Argon live
Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.
Detect and compare bounding boxes across models on the same image.
Upload an image
Drag and drop an image here, or click to browse
Models in this comparison
Gemini 3.5 Flash vs Gemini 4 Argon on Vision Evals
Gemini 4 Argon scores higher on 4 of the five Vision Evals tasks.
The widest gap is Object Detection, where Gemini 4 Argon leads 82.5% to 70.6%.
Overall, Gemini 3.5 Flash averages 81.8% (#4 of 63) against 87.5% (#1 of 63) for Gemini 4 Argon.
Gemini 4 Argon is cheaper ($0.0058 vs $0.012 per sample), while Gemini 3.5 Flash is faster (11.5s vs 13.4s per sample).
Gemini 3.5 Flash vs Gemini 4 Argon Comparison Table
Evals updated October 13, 2026Pricing updated October 19, 2026
| Property | Gemini 3.5 Flash | Gemini 4 Argon |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | ||
| Category | closed | closed |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | May 2026 | Oct 2026 |
| Context Window | 1.0M | 1.0M |
| Parameters | Unknown | Undisclosed |
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Commercial use | commercial use per vendor terms | commercial use per vendor terms |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $1.50 | $2.00 |
| Output $/1M | $9.00 | $10.00 |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | Demo |
| Chart Question Answering | Supported | Supported |
| Classification | Demo | Demo |
| Document Question Answering | Supported | Supported |
| Image Tagging | Supported | Supported |
| Multi-Label Classification | Supported | Supported |
| Object Detection | Demo | Demo |
| OCR | Demo | Demo |
| Vision Language | Supported | Supported |
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | Demo |
| Promptable Concept Segmentation | Not listed | Demo |
| Model Features | ||
| Foundation Vision | Supported | Supported |
| LLMs with Vision Capabilities | Supported | Supported |
| Multimodal Vision | Supported | Supported |
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 5 vision tasks, pooled at low effort | ||
| Overall | 81.8% | 87.5% |
| Avg cost / sample | $0.012 | $0.0058 |
| Avg speed / sample | 11.52s | 13.40s |
| By task | ||
| Object Detection (low) | 70.6% ±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 68.7 to 72.6 | 82.5% ±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.9 to 83.0 |
| Object Detection (high) | 69.8% ±1.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 67.5 to 71.1 | 85.1% ±0.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.3 to 85.5 |
| Counting (low) | 80.6% ±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 79.7 to 81.1 | 86.0% ±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 85.1 to 86.5 |
| Counting (high) | 82.4% ±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 82.4 to 82.4 | 90.5% ±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 89.2 to 91.9 |
| Identification (low) | 99.0% ±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 96.9 to 100.0 | 93.8% ±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 93.8 to 93.8 |
| Identification (high) | 97.9% ±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 96.9 to 100.0 | 96.9% ±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 96.9 to 96.9 |
| OCR (low) | 76.7% | 85.7% |
| by category |
|
|
| OCR (high) | 75.5% | 88.0% |
| by category |
|
|
| Reasoning (low) | 82.1% ±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 80.1 to 84.1 | 89.4% ±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 88.1 to 90.7 |
| Reasoning (high) | 81.0% ±1.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 79.5 to 82.8 | 91.4% ±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.7 to 92.0 |
Gemini 3.5 Flash vs Gemini 4 Argon: Overview
Gemini 3.5 Flash is a multimodal language model developed by Google DeepMind and released at Google I/O 2026. It is built on the Gemini 3 Flash reasoning foundation and introduces configurable thinking levels (minimal, low, medium, and high) that allow developers to tune the depth of internal reasoning before a response is generated. The model accepts text, image, video, audio, and PDF inputs and produces text output, with a 1 million token context window and up to 65,000 output tokens per request. It is natively multimodal, processing visual inputs alongside text to support tasks such as image captioning, classification, optical character recognition, object detection, and visual grounding, where the model references specific regions within an image or video frame.
Its vision capabilities extend to interpreting UI screenshots, diagrams, charts, and real-world scenes, as well as understanding video and live frame sequences for activity and scene recognition. The model supports combined tool use, including Google Search, URL context, code execution, and custom functions, within a single request, and it uses reasoning context from previous turns when thought signatures are present in the conversation history, enabling persistent multi-turn reasoning chains. Gemini 3.5 Flash carries a knowledge cutoff of January 2026 and is available via the Gemini API, Google AI Studio, Google Antigravity, and the Gemini Enterprise Agent Platform.
Gemini 4 Argon is Google DeepMind's frontier Gemini 4 model, built to sustain extended reasoning across long-horizon workflows in software engineering, enterprise knowledge work such as legal and finance, scientific analysis, and defensive cybersecurity. It accepts text, image, video, and document input and returns text, operating over a one million token context window. The model raises the maximum output length to one million tokens, compared with a 64K ceiling on earlier Gemini releases, so a single reasoning trajectory can run for hundreds of thousands of tokens before terminating.
On the visual side, Argon targets multimodal document comprehension, professional chart analysis, and retrieval of specific details from long recordings, reporting 91.7% on LVBench for long-video understanding and 71.6% on Chartography for chart reasoning. Google also reports 77.9% on DeepSWE v1.1, 51.3% on AutomationBench, 68% on CWE-bench v1, and first place on the Vals Index, which aggregates finance, coding, legal, and tax tasks. Following Gemini API conventions, it localizes objects by emitting bounding boxes as [ymin, xmin, ymax, xmax] integers normalized to a 0 to 1000 range, which supports prompt driven detection and grounding alongside captioning, document parsing, and visual question answering. Google describes adversarial training and automated red teaming for indirect prompt injection resistance, plus chain-of-thought and action monitors that halt execution when behavior drifts outside user intent.
Frequently Asked Questions
On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Gemini 4 Argon performed better. It scores higher on 4 of the five vision tasks and averages 87.5% (#1 of 63) against 81.8% (#4 of 63) for Gemini 3.5 Flash. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.
No. On the Vision Evals Object Detection benchmark at low effort, Gemini 4 Argon leads with 82.5% against 70.6%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.
Gemini 4 Argon is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0058 per sample against $0.012. Gemini 3.5 Flash is priced at $1.50 per 1M input tokens and $9.00 per 1M output; Gemini 4 Argon is priced at $2.00 per 1M input tokens and $10.00 per 1M output. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.
Gemini 3.5 Flash is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 11.5s per inference against 13.4s. 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 open prompts and image captioning in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.