Model comparison
Gemma 3n E4b IT vs Qwen3.5-Flash
Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.3 to 36.7 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3n E4b IT costs 2.3× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.5-Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 3n E4b IT scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.5-Flash in 7 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.5-Flash leads 32.9 to 19.2.
- Gemma 3n E4b IT is cheaper at $0.06 / $0.12 per million input/output tokens, against $0.10 / $0.40 for Qwen3.5-Flash.
- Qwen3.5-Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 33K.
- Gemma 3n E4b IT has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemma 3n E4b IT | Qwen3.5-Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 36.7 | 42.3 |
| Released | 2025-05-20 | 2026-02-23 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 33K | 1M |
| Max output | 33K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.06 | $0.10 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.12 | $0.40 |
| Results tracked | 18 | 32 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Gemma 3n E4b IT leads
Gemma 3n E4b IT: 36.4 (#193), Qwen3.5-Flash: 33.9 (#234)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1269 | 1412 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1243 |
| ALE-Bench | — | 221.8 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemma 3n E4b IT: —, Qwen3.5-Flash: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 462.69 |
Reasoning Qwen3.5-Flash leads
Gemma 3n E4b IT: 19.2 (#239), Qwen3.5-Flash: 32.9 (#63)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1284 | 1404 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 31.5% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 21% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 20% |
| DTBench | — | 82.9% |
| LMCA | — | 29.1% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 143.98 |
Math Qwen3.5-Flash leads
Gemma 3n E4b IT: 32.5 (#186), Qwen3.5-Flash: 36.3 (#117)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1251 | 1407 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 18.2% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 84.4% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 6.2% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 0% |
Knowledge Qwen3.5-Flash leads
Gemma 3n E4b IT: 33.6 (#193), Qwen3.5-Flash: 43.2 (#84)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1245 | 1408 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 82.3% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 20.3% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 10.5% |
Multilingual Qwen3.5-Flash leads
Gemma 3n E4b IT: 43.5 (#179), Qwen3.5-Flash: 50.7 (#116)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1285 | 1385 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1310 | 1446 |
| LMArena French | 1330 | 1412 |
| LMArena German | 1312 | 1389 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1274 | 1369 |
| LMArena Korean | 1259 | 1344 |
| LMArena Russian | 1288 | 1379 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1305 | 1399 |
Instruction Following Qwen3.5-Flash leads
Gemma 3n E4b IT: 66.3 (#205), Qwen3.5-Flash: 72.8 (#133)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1255 | 1374 |
Long Context Qwen3.5-Flash leads
Gemma 3n E4b IT: 38.8 (#185), Qwen3.5-Flash: 42.4 (#119)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1277 | 1392 |
Writing & Preference Qwen3.5-Flash leads
Gemma 3n E4b IT: 50.3 (#181), Qwen3.5-Flash: 58.2 (#117)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1306 | 1397 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1287 | 1343 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1276 | 1393 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 3n E4b IT better than Qwen3.5-Flash?
Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.3 to 36.7 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3n E4b IT costs 2.3× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.5-Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Gemma 3n E4b IT or Qwen3.5-Flash?
Gemma 3n E4b IT is cheaper. It lists at $0.06 per million input tokens and $0.12 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5-Flash lists at $0.10 and $0.40.
Is Gemma 3n E4b IT or Qwen3.5-Flash better for coding?
Gemma 3n E4b IT scores higher on coding benchmarks: 36.4 versus 33.9 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3.5-Flash does, with 1M tokens against 33K.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 3n E4b IT and Qwen3.5-Flash share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3n E4b IT has 18 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5-Flash has 32.