Model comparison
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite vs Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.3 to 31.5 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 24 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 24 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct in 1 category; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite leads 31.8 to 18.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 52.5% for Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite and 62.9% for Qwen2.5 72B Instruct.
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 37.3 | 31.5 |
| Released | 2025-02-05 | 2024-09 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 131K |
| Max output | — | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $1.40 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $5.60 |
| Results tracked | 32 | 43 |
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: 37.4 (#181), Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 32.8 (#256)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1322 | 1293 |
| WeirdML | — | 16% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 45.8% |
| LiveBench Coding | 47.1% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 55.9% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: —, Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 22.0 (#124)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| TheAgentCompany | — | 5.7% |
| BALROG | — | 16.2% |
| METR Time Horizons | — | 35.8% |
Reasoning Too close to call
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 21.2 (#203), Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 21.4 (#197)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1324 | 1271 |
| DTBench | 52.5% | 62.9% |
| ForecastBench | 57.1 | 57.5 |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 50.1% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 65.5% | — |
| LMCA | — | 13.4% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 79.8% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 129.01 |
| HellaSwag | — | 84.8% |
| LiveBench | 54.3% | — |
| PIQA | — | 82.6% |
| WinoGrande | — | 82.3% |
Math Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 31.8 (#192), Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 18.1 (#281)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Omni-MATH | 37.4% | 33% |
| LMArena Math | 1309 | 1283 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 8.1% |
| LiveBench Math | 58.1% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 63.2% |
Knowledge Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 34.6 (#185), Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 26.9 (#247)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU-Pro | 72% | 63.1% |
| GPQA (HELM) | 50% | 42.6% |
| LMArena Expert | 1305 | 1245 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 49.1% |
| Confabulations | — | 19.1% |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 94.5% |
| MMLU | — | 85.3% |
| TriviaQA | — | 71.9% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 30.6 (#103), Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1100 | — |
Multilingual Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 46.2 (#156), Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 41.2 (#208)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1323 | 1252 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1339 | 1272 |
| LMArena French | 1346 | 1279 |
| LMArena German | 1306 | 1234 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1302 | 1180 |
| LMArena Korean | 1325 | 1188 |
| LMArena Russian | 1328 | 1264 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1313 | 1255 |
Instruction Following Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 70.6 (#158), Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 65.7 (#216)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | 82.4% | 80.6% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1305 | 1254 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 78.3% | — |
Long Context Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 40.1 (#155), Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 38.9 (#183)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1321 | 1282 |
Writing & Preference Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 51.9 (#172), Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 46.9 (#210)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1330 | 1269 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1319 | 1221 |
| WildBench | 79% | 80.2% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1307 | 1272 |
| LiveBench Language | 34.3% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite better than Qwen2.5 72B Instruct?
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.3 to 31.5 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite or Qwen2.5 72B Instruct better for coding?
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.4 versus 32.8 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct share?
24 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite has 32 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct has 43.