Gemini 3.5 Flash-LitevsQwen3-Coder-Next
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3-Coder-Next | |
|---|---|---|
| Specifications | ||
Parameters | — | 80B |
Context window | — | 256k |
| Benchmarks | ||
Nonsense detection BullshitBench v2Given a confidently-worded but nonsensical prompt, does the AI spot that it makes no sense and push back — instead of playing along and inventing an answer? The score is how often it clearly called out the nonsense. Higher is better. | 65% | — |
Agentic coding SWE-Bench ProCan the AI fix real bugs in real software? It's handed actual problems from open-source projects and has to write code that genuinely solves them. Higher is better. | 54.2%Best | 44.3% |
Coding SWE-Bench VerifiedReal coding tasks pulled from open-source projects — the AI has to find and fix actual bugs. A human-checked version of the original SWE-Bench. Higher is better. | — | 70.6% |
Multilingual coding SWE-Bench MultilingualLike SWE-Bench, but the coding problems span many programming languages, not just one. Tests how broadly the AI can code. Higher is better. | — | 62.8% |
Agentic terminal coding Terminal-Bench 2.1Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? Higher is better. | 54% | — |
Agentic terminal coding Terminal-Bench 2.0Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? (Version 2.0 of the test.) Higher is better. | — | 36.2% |
Browser agent BU BenchCan the AI drive a real web browser to finish tasks — clicking, filling forms, and navigating sites the way a person would? Run by Browser Use on their BU Bench task set. Higher is better. | 49% | — |
Agentic computer use OSWorld-VerifiedCan the AI actually operate a computer — clicking, typing, and using real apps — to finish tasks on its own? Higher is better. | 74% | — |
Knowledge work GDPval-AA v2economically valuable knowledge work (v2, re-based Elo) | 1140 | — |
Community preference (code) Arena Elo (Code)Like the text arena, but people vote on which AI writes better code. The votes become a chess-style Elo rating on arena.ai. Higher is better. | 1447 | — |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Qwen | |
| Release date | Jul 21 2026 | Feb 3 2026 |
| Access | Proprietary | Open Weight |
Which is better: Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or Qwen3-Coder-Next?
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads Qwen3-Coder-Next on 1 of the 1 benchmark they both report (SWE-Bench Pro). Qwen3-Coder-Next shipped 168 days before Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite is proprietary, while Qwen3-Coder-Next is open weight.
On SWE-Bench Pro, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads at 54.2% vs Qwen3-Coder-Next at 44.3%.
Frequently asked questions
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite was released by Google on Jul 21 2026.
Qwen3-Coder-Next was released by Qwen on Feb 3 2026.
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads on SWE-Bench Pro — Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite 54.2% vs Qwen3-Coder-Next 44.3%.
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite is a proprietary model released by Google. Qwen3-Coder-Next is an open weight model released by Qwen.
Other comparisons
Gemini 3.5 Flash-LitevsClaude Opus 5Qwen3-Coder-NextvsClaude Opus 5Gemini 3.5 Flash-LitevsGPT-5.6 SolQwen3-Coder-NextvsGPT-5.6 SolGemini 3.5 Flash-LitevsMuse Spark 1.1Qwen3-Coder-NextvsMuse Spark 1.1Gemini 3.5 Flash-LitevsGrok 4.5Qwen3-Coder-NextvsGrok 4.5Gemini 3.5 Flash-LitevsDeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731Qwen3-Coder-NextvsDeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731Gemini 3.5 Flash-LitevsMistral Medium 3.5Qwen3-Coder-NextvsMistral Medium 3.5