Google · Efficient
Gemini 3.5 Flash Thinking
Gemini 3.5 Flash with higher thinking enabled for harder reasoning, agentic coding, tool use, multimodal analysis, and long-context workflows. Audio input costs $3.00 per million audio tokens.
- Reasoning
- Vision
- Audio input
- Video input
- Input
- Text, Images, Video, Audio
- Output
- Text
- Reasoning effort
- minimal · low · medium · high
- Discovery tier
- Efficient
Pricing
USD per 1M tokens- Input
- $1.50
- Output
- $9.00
- Cache read
- $0.15
- Cache write
- $0.0833
Reference prices as published by the model provider. API example
Specifications
- Context window
- 1M
- Max output
- 65.5K
- Average output (7 days)
- 1.7K tokens
- Longer than 88% of 465 models
Side by side
Gemini 3.5 Flash Thinking compared
Specifications, prices, speed and benchmark scores next to each other. Benchmarks below show every compared model too.
| Gemini 3.5 Flash ThinkingGoogleThis model | Muse Spark 1.1MetaRemove | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | |
| Discovery tier | Efficient | Balanced |
| Added | May 19, 2026 | Jul 9, 2026 |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 1.05MBest | 1M |
| Max output | 65.54K | 65.54K |
| Average output | 1.7K tokens | 460 tokens |
| Pricing, USD per 1M tokens | ||
| Input | $1.50 | $1.25Best |
| Output | $9.00 | $4.25Best |
| Cache read | $0.15 | $0.15 |
| Cache write | $0.0833 | — |
| Performance | ||
| Throughput | 46.8 tok/s | — |
| Time to first token | 8.7 s | — |
| Request success (24h) | 90.1% | — |
| Benchmark indexes | ||
| Intelligence Index | 32.6 | 33.7Best |
| Coding Index | 70.1 | 71.3Best |
| Capabilities | ||
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes |
| Vision | Yes | Yes |
| Audio input | Yes | Yes |
| Video input | Yes | Yes |
| Reasoning effort | minimal, low, medium, high | minimal, low, medium, high, xhigh |
Public evaluations
Benchmarks
Independent evaluation results, with how each score ranks among the models in the Noumen catalog.
- Gemini 3.5 Flash Thinking
- Muse Spark 1.1
Intelligence Index
- Gemini 3.5 Flash Thinking32.6
- Muse Spark 1.133.7
Gemini 3.5 Flash Thinking tested at high reasoning effort
Gemini 3.5 Flash Thinking: Better than 76% of 326 scored models
Indexes
Coding Index
Composite of the coding evaluations
- Gemini 3.5 Flash Thinking: 70.1
- Muse Spark 1.1: 71.3Top
Agentic work
AutomationBench-AA
Workflow automation, penalized for guardrail violations
- Gemini 3.5 Flash Thinking: 42.1%Top
- Muse Spark 1.1: 38.8%
AutomationBench-AA tasks completed
Workflows finished end to end without a guardrail violation
- Gemini 3.5 Flash Thinking: 13.5%
- Muse Spark 1.1: 13.7%Top
AA-Briefcasev1.1
Agentic knowledge work, rated head to head
- Gemini 3.5 Flash Thinking: 874 EloTop
- Muse Spark 1.1: 850 Elo
GDPval-AAv2.1
Economically valuable occupational tasks, rated head to head
- Gemini 3.5 Flash Thinking: 1,202 Elo
- Muse Spark 1.1: 1,211 EloTop
Document reasoning
GDP.pdf
Professional reasoning over PDF documents, all-pass rate
- Gemini 3.5 Flash Thinking: 19.8%Top
- Muse Spark 1.1: 14.4%
AA-LCRv1.1
Reasoning across long documents
- Gemini 3.5 Flash Thinking: 73.3%
- Muse Spark 1.1: 77.7%Top
MLCR-AA
Long-context reasoning over medical records
- Gemini 3.5 Flash Thinking: 10.0%Top
- Muse Spark 1.1: 7.2%
Reasoning and knowledge
Humanity’s Last Exam
Expert-level questions across academic fields
- Gemini 3.5 Flash Thinking: 42.7%
- Muse Spark 1.1: 46.2%Top
GPQA Diamond
Graduate-level science questions
- Gemini 3.5 Flash Thinking: 92.2%Top
- Muse Spark 1.1: 89.8%
IFBench
Following precise output instructions
- Gemini 3.5 Flash Thinking: 76.3%
- Muse Spark 1.1: —
Coding
Terminal-Benchv4.0
Practical software engineering in a terminal
- Gemini 3.5 Flash Thinking: 6.6%Top
- Muse Spark 1.1: 6.1%
SciCode
Scientific computing in Python
- Gemini 3.5 Flash Thinking: 53.9%
- Muse Spark 1.1: 58.8%Top
Legacy evaluations
Terminal-Bench Hard
Earlier terminal task suite
- Gemini 3.5 Flash Thinking: 40.9%
- Muse Spark 1.1: —
τ²-Bench Telecom
Tool use in a customer-support simulation
- Gemini 3.5 Flash Thinking: 95.3%
- Muse Spark 1.1: —
AA-LCR (unversioned)
Long-context reasoning, earlier grading
- Gemini 3.5 Flash Thinking: 73.3%
- Muse Spark 1.1: 77.7%Top
Scores from Artificial Analysis, updated Oct 26, 2026. Gemini 3.5 Flash Thinking was tested at high reasoning effort; compare scores measured at the same effort.Artificial Analysis
- Gemini 3.5 Flash Thinking
- Muse Spark 1.1
| Leaderboard | Gemini 3.5 Flash Thinking | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Roleplay | Not in top 20 | #15 · 23.8% |
Ranks among Noumen catalog models on Use cases leaderboards. Only top-20 placements are listed.
- Gemini 3.5 Flash Thinking
- Muse Spark 1.1
| Leaderboard | Gemini 3.5 Flash Thinking | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Overall | Not in top 20 | #12 · 1489.9 |
| Coding | Not in top 20 | #17 · 1532.7 |
| Hard Prompts | Not in top 20 | #15 · 1510.0 |
| Chinese | Not in top 20 | #18 · 1528.6 |
| English | Not in top 20 | #18 · 1490.0 |
| Exclude Ties | Not in top 20 | #13 · 1505.1 |
| French | Not in top 20 | #6 · 1514.8 |
| Industry Business And Management And Financial Operations | Not in top 20 | #9 · 1490.8 |
| Industry Legal And Government | Not in top 20 | #13 · 1497.5 |
| Industry Life And Physical And Social Science | Not in top 20 | #17 · 1501.1 |
| Industry Mathematical | Not in top 20 | #20 · 1498.3 |
| Industry Medicine And Healthcare | Not in top 20 | #16 · 1500.5 |
| Industry Software And It Services | Not in top 20 | #12 · 1524.6 |
| Korean | Not in top 20 | #6 · 1473.8 |
| Multi Turn | Not in top 20 | #12 · 1495.6 |
| Non English | Not in top 20 | #12 · 1482.7 |
| Polish | Not in top 20 | #4 · 1509.4 |
| Russian | Not in top 20 | #16 · 1493.3 |
| Vision Style Control · Chinese | Not in top 20 | #13 · 1335.5 |
| Vision Style Control · Humor | Not in top 20 | #11 · 1274.9 |
| Document Overall | Not in top 20 | #15 · 1464.7 |
| Document Style Control Overall | Not in top 20 | #9 · 1479.5 |
Ranks among Noumen catalog models on LMArena leaderboards. Only top-20 placements are listed.LMArena
- Gemini 3.5 Flash Thinking
- Muse Spark 1.1
| Leaderboard | Gemini 3.5 Flash Thinking | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| EQ-Bench 4 | Not in top 20 | #10 · 1252 |
| Creative Writing v3 | Not in top 20 | #14 · 1928 |
Ranks among Noumen catalog models on EQ-Bench leaderboards. Only top-20 placements are listed.EQ-Bench
Live routing data
Performance and reliability
Recent averages across requests routed for this model. Your own speed depends on prompt length, reasoning effort and load.
- Throughput
- 46.8 tok/s
- Faster than 34% of 250 models
- Time to first token
- 8.7 s
- Quicker than 14% of 250 models
- Prompt cache hits
- 21.3%
- About $1.21 per 1M input tokens with caching
- Request success (24h)
- 90.2%
- Unstable
Cache hits are the share of input tokens recently served from a prompt cache across all requests. They are not a forecast of your own hit rate.
- Healthy (98% or more)
- Degraded (90–98%)
- Down (under 90%)
- No requests
Developers
Use it through the API
Noumen’s API is OpenAI-compatible: any Chat Completions client works with a base URL and a key.
curl https://www.noumen.xyz/api/v1/chat/completions \
-H "Authorization: Bearer $NOUMEN_API_KEY" \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{
"model": "google/gemini-3.5-flash-thinking",
"reasoning_effort": "medium",
"messages": [{ "role": "user", "content": "Explain this stack trace." }]
}'import os
from openai import OpenAI
client = OpenAI(base_url="https://www.noumen.xyz/api/v1", api_key=os.environ["NOUMEN_API_KEY"])
reply = client.chat.completions.create(
model="google/gemini-3.5-flash-thinking",
messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Explain this stack trace."}],
)
print(reply.choices[0].message.content)Related models
Other Google models, starting with the same family.