LLMs & Assistants

Gemini vs Qwen.

Both sit in LLMs & Assistants, scored on the same six pillars from the same published methodology. Here is where they actually differ.

The short answer

Gemini scores higher — 90.4 against 84.1, a margin of 6.3 points. That is the overall answer, not the whole one: the pillar breakdown below is where the decision usually actually gets made.

Gemini leads on security & compliance, maturity & reliability and capability.

Gemini

Google

90.4

Exceptional

Google's multimodal frontier models woven through Workspace and Android.

From
Free / $19.99 per month (AI Pro)
Pricing
Freemium
Maturity
Mature
Founded
2023
Qwen

Alibaba Cloud

84.1

Excellent

Alibaba's open-weight LLM family, strong on code, math, and agentic tasks

From
Free (open-weight, self-hosted) / API from ~$0.05 per 1M input tokens
Pricing
Freemium
Maturity
Established
Founded
2023

Pillar by pillar

The same six pillars and fixed weights used for every tool on the site. A lead of fewer than 5 points is not called for either side — these are evidence-backed judgements, not measurements. Read the methodology.

Capability

Gemini by 6

Gemini93
Qwen87

Value for Money

Level

Gemini90
Qwen92

Security & Compliance

Gemini by 20

Gemini88
Qwen68

Integrations & Ecosystem

Gemini by 6

Gemini91
Qwen85

Maturity & Reliability

Gemini by 8

Gemini86
Qwen78

Momentum

Level

Gemini90
Qwen90

Which one, and when

Pick Gemini if

  • compliance and data control decide it — it leads Security & Compliance by 20 points.
  • it has to hold up in production from day one — it leads Maturity & Reliability by 8 points.
  • the hardest end of the work is what you are buying for — it leads Capability by 6 points.
  • Google Workspace organizations
  • Multimodal workloads
  • Cost-sensitive API usage at scale

The catch

  • Product surface changes frequently; naming and tiers can confuse
  • Best experience assumes commitment to the Google ecosystem
Full Gemini profile →

Pick Qwen if

  • Developers wanting low-cost, self-hostable open-weight LLMs for coding and agentic workflows
  • Enterprises needing multilingual, multimodal models via a single unified API
  • Cost-sensitive production deployments seeking frontier-adjacent performance at a fraction of Western model pricing

The catch

  • Newer flagship tiers (Qwen3.6/3.7-Max) have shifted to closed weights, limiting self-hosting for the most capable models
  • Some large models use the more restrictive Tongyi Qianwen License rather than Apache 2.0, with commercial caps tied to MAU thresholds
Full Qwen profile →

What each is good at

Gemini

  • Native multimodality including long-video understanding
  • 1M+ token context windows at competitive API prices
  • Ships inside Gmail, Docs, Sheets and Android at massive scale

Qwen

  • Aggressive price-to-performance with open-weight Apache 2.0 models that can be self-hosted at zero per-token cost
  • Strong, frequently-updated coding and agentic performance, including high SWE-bench Verified scores
  • Broad model catalogue spanning text, vision, audio, coding and embeddings under one API

Other comparisons in LLMs & Assistants

Comparing something else? Build your own side-by-side across any tools in the catalog.