Noometry

Model comparison

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite vs Qwen2.5-Max

Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.7 to 37.8 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 24 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite Google

37.8

Rank #194 Confirmed

Qwen2.5-Max Alibaba (Qwen)

40.7

Rank #146 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 24 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen2.5-Max in 8 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in coding, where Qwen2.5-Max leads 41.8 to 37.9.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is LiveBench Language: 34.3% for Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite and 56.3% for Qwen2.5-Max.

Side by side

Gemini 2.0 Flash-LiteQwen2.5-Max
ProviderGoogleAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index37.840.7
Released2025-02-052025-01-25
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window——
Max output——
Input $ / M tokens——
Output $ / M tokens——
Results tracked3227

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen2.5-Max leads

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 37.9 (#185), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.8 (#117)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteQwen2.5-Max
LiveBench Coding47.1%64.4%
LMArena Coding13221359

Reasoning Qwen2.5-Max leads

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 22.0 (#210), Qwen2.5-Max: 25.6 (#147)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteQwen2.5-Max
LiveBench Reasoning50.1%51.4%
LMArena Hard Prompts13241360
LiveBench Data Analysis65.5%67.9%
LiveBench54.3%62.3%
DTBench52.5%—
Epoch Capabilities Index—132.53
ForecastBench57.1—

Math Qwen2.5-Max leads

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 34.1 (#196), Qwen2.5-Max: 36.9 (#162)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteQwen2.5-Max
LiveBench Math58.1%58.4%
LMArena Math13091369
Omni-MATH37.4%—

Knowledge Too close to call

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 35.0 (#189), Qwen2.5-Max: 35.3 (#186)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteQwen2.5-Max
LMArena Expert13051337
MMLU-Pro72%—
Confabulations—21.8%
GPQA (HELM)50%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 31.2 (#109), Qwen2.5-Max: —

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteQwen2.5-Max
LMArena Vision1100—

Multilingual Qwen2.5-Max leads

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 46.0 (#161), Qwen2.5-Max: 48.1 (#146)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteQwen2.5-Max
LMArena Non-English13231352
LMArena Chinese13391382
LMArena French13471396
LMArena German13061350
LMArena Japanese13011300
LMArena Korean13251304
LMArena Russian13281353
LMArena Spanish13131377

Instruction Following Too close to call

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 70.4 (#163), Qwen2.5-Max: 71.3 (#152)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteQwen2.5-Max
LiveBench Instruction Following78.3%75.3%
LMArena Instruction Following13051335
IFEval82.4%—

Long Context Qwen2.5-Max leads

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 40.1 (#160), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.4 (#142)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteQwen2.5-Max
LMArena Longer Query13201358

Writing & Preference Qwen2.5-Max leads

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 51.7 (#177), Qwen2.5-Max: 55.4 (#146)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteQwen2.5-Max
LMArena Text13301367
LMArena Creative Writing13191339
LMArena Multi-Turn13071364
LiveBench Language34.3%56.3%
Short-Story Creative Writing—72.9%
WildBench79%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite better than Qwen2.5-Max?

Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.7 to 37.8 on the Noometry Index.

Is Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite or Qwen2.5-Max better for coding?

Qwen2.5-Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.8 versus 37.9 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite and Qwen2.5-Max share?

24 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite has 32 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Max has 27.

Related comparisons

Go deeper