Noometry

Model comparison

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite vs Qwen1.5-14B

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.8 to 32.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite Google

37.8

Rank #194 Confirmed

Qwen1.5-14B Alibaba (Qwen)

32.7

Rank #253 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen1.5-14B in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite leads 51.7 to 33.6.
  • Qwen1.5-14B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemini 2.0 Flash-LiteQwen1.5-14B
ProviderGoogleAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index37.832.7
Released2025-02-052024-02-04
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window——
Max output——
Input $ / M tokens——
Output $ / M tokens——
Results tracked3217

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite leads

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 37.9 (#185), Qwen1.5-14B: 33.1 (#263)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteQwen1.5-14B
LMArena Coding13221138
LiveBench Coding47.1%—

Reasoning Too close to call

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 22.0 (#210), Qwen1.5-14B: 21.4 (#223)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteQwen1.5-14B
LMArena Hard Prompts13241113
LiveBench Reasoning50.1%—
DTBench52.5%—
LiveBench Data Analysis65.5%—
ForecastBench57.1—
LiveBench54.3%—

Math Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite leads

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 34.1 (#196), Qwen1.5-14B: 32.4 (#215)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteQwen1.5-14B
LMArena Math13091125
Omni-MATH37.4%—
LiveBench Math58.1%—

Knowledge Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite leads

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 35.0 (#189), Qwen1.5-14B: 29.8 (#232)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteQwen1.5-14B
LMArena Expert13051094
MMLU-Pro72%—
GPQA (HELM)50%—
MMLU—68.6%

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 31.2 (#109), Qwen1.5-14B: —

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteQwen1.5-14B
LMArena Vision1100—

Multilingual Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite leads

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 46.0 (#161), Qwen1.5-14B: 30.7 (#262)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteQwen1.5-14B
LMArena Non-English13231095
LMArena Chinese13391147
LMArena French13471116
LMArena German13061043
LMArena Japanese13011019
LMArena Russian13281046
LMArena Spanish13131085
LMArena Korean1325—

Instruction Following Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite leads

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 70.4 (#163), Qwen1.5-14B: 56.8 (#271)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteQwen1.5-14B
LMArena Instruction Following13051102
LiveBench Instruction Following78.3%—
IFEval82.4%—

Long Context Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite leads

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 40.1 (#160), Qwen1.5-14B: 33.7 (#257)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteQwen1.5-14B
LMArena Longer Query13201113

Writing & Preference Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite leads

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 51.7 (#177), Qwen1.5-14B: 33.6 (#276)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteQwen1.5-14B
LMArena Text13301128
LMArena Creative Writing13191091
LMArena Multi-Turn13071110
WildBench79%—
LiveBench Language34.3%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite better than Qwen1.5-14B?

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.8 to 32.7 on the Noometry Index.

Is Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite or Qwen1.5-14B better for coding?

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.9 versus 33.1 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite and Qwen1.5-14B share?

16 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite has 32 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-14B has 17.

Related comparisons

Go deeper