Gemini 3.5 vs North Mini Code
Pricing, benchmarks, and use case comparison
Quick take
- •Gemini 3.5 is meaningfully stronger at multimodal (90 vs 5 on our capability index).
- •North Mini Code is 100% cheaper on input tokens, which compounds fast on high-volume or agentic workloads.
- •North Mini Code has a 256K tokens context window vs 1,048,576 tokens (Gemini 3.5 Flash; Pro variant not yet released) - better for whole-repo or long-document work.
Specs comparison
| Gemini 3.5 | North Mini Code | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google DeepMind | Cohere |
| Type | Closed source | Closed source |
| Context window | 1,048,576 tokens (Gemini 3.5 Flash; Pro variant not yet released) | ✓256K tokens |
| Input / 1M tokens | $1.50 | ✓0 |
| Output / 1M tokens | $9.00 | 0 |
| Release date | 2026-05 | 2026-06 |
Benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 | North Mini Code |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (coding) | 76.2% | - |
| MCP Atlas (tool use) | 83.6% | - |
| CharXiv Reasoning (multimodal) | 84.2% | - |
| Artificial Analysis Coding Index | - | 33.4 |
| Throughput vs Devstral Small 2 | - | Up to 2.8x higher output throughput |
Scores sourced from official provider release posts and independent benchmark aggregators.
Which should you choose?
Choose Gemini 3.5 if...
- →You need frontier agent/coding performance without frontier prices
- →Building autonomous agents that make many tool calls
- →High-throughput production workloads that were previously too costly on a Pro model
- →You want a strong default multimodal model with a 1M-token context window
Choose North Mini Code if...
- →You want a self-hostable, sovereign coding agent on modest hardware
- →You run agentic SWE workflows (repo edits, sub-agent orchestration, code review)
- →You need terminal/tool-driven multi-turn agents
- →You want high coding throughput at low compute cost