StepFun Step 3.5 Flash vs Gamma

Which one should you pick? Here's the full breakdown.

StepFun Step 3.5 Flash

B
7.8/10

StepFun's (China) agent-focused open-weight model -- Step 3.5 Flash launched 2026-02-01. 196B sparse MoE, ~11B active. Benchmarks slightly ahead of DeepSeek V3.2 at over 3x smaller total size. Step 3 (321B / 38B active, Apache 2.0) and Step3-VL-10B multimodal also in the family

Our Pick

Gamma

B
7.9/10

AI presentation maker that turns prompts into polished, web-native decks in minutes

CategoryStepFun Step 3.5 FlashGamma
Ease of Use6.09.0
Output Quality8.07.5
Value9.08.0
Features8.07.0
Overall7.87.9

Pricing Comparison

FeatureStepFun Step 3.5 FlashGamma
Free TierYesYes
Starting Price$0$0

Which Should You Pick?

Pick StepFun Step 3.5 Flash if...

  • Better value for money (9/10)
  • More features (8 vs 7)

Teams building agent systems on Chinese open-weight foundations who want something other than DeepSeek or Qwen, especially if agentic tool-use is the primary workload. Also good for Chinese-market products where StepFun's domestic tuning advantages matter. And for anyone looking to add diversity to their open-weight evaluation matrix beyond the top-3 Chinese labs.

Visit StepFun Step 3.5 Flash

Pick Gamma if...

  • Easier to use (9 vs 6)

Startup founders pitching investors, marketers building quick client presentations, and anyone who needs a solid deck fast without touching PowerPoint.

Visit Gamma

Our Verdict

StepFun Step 3.5 Flash and Gamma are extremely close overall. Your choice comes down to specific needs -- StepFun Step 3.5 Flash is better for teams building agent systems on chinese open-weight foundations who want something other than deepseek or qwen, especially if agentic tool-use is the primary workload, while Gamma works best for startup founders pitching investors, marketers building quick client presentations, and anyone who needs a solid deck fast without touching powerpoint.