Noometry

Model comparison

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite vs Qwen3 14B

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.3 to 35.0 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite Google

37.3

Rank #189 Confirmed

Qwen3 14B Alibaba (Qwen)

35.0

Rank #222 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite scores higher in 3 categories and Qwen3 14B in 2 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3 14B leads 37.0 to 31.8.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 52.5% for Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite and 64% for Qwen3 14B.
  • Qwen3 14B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemini 2.0 Flash-LiteQwen3 14B
ProviderGoogleAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index37.335.0
Released2025-02-052025-04
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window—131K
Max output—8K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.35
Output $ / M tokens—$1.40
Results tracked3212

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

Category by category

Coding Too close to call

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 37.4 (#181), Qwen3 14B: 36.7 (#191)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteQwen3 14B
SciCode—31.6%
LiveBench Coding47.1%—
LMArena Coding1322—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: —, Qwen3 14B: 29.4 (#78)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteQwen3 14B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—41%

Reasoning Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite leads

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 21.2 (#203), Qwen3 14B: 18.1 (#272)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteQwen3 14B
DTBench52.5%64%
Kagi LLM Benchmark—49.1%
CritPt—0%
Chess Puzzles—4%
LiveBench Reasoning50.1%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1324—
LiveBench Data Analysis65.5%—
LMCA—18.2%
Epoch Capabilities Index—138.23
ForecastBench57.1—
LiveBench54.3%—

Math Qwen3 14B leads

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 31.8 (#192), Qwen3 14B: 37.0 (#102)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteQwen3 14B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—66.4%
Omni-MATH37.4%—
LiveBench Math58.1%—
LMArena Math1309—

Knowledge Qwen3 14B leads

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 34.6 (#185), Qwen3 14B: 39.2 (#124)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteQwen3 14B
GPQA Diamond—63.8%
MMLU-Pro72%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate—5.4%
GPQA (HELM)50%—
LMArena Expert1305—

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 30.6 (#103), Qwen3 14B: —

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteQwen3 14B
LMArena Vision1100—

Multilingual Not comparable

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 46.2 (#156), Qwen3 14B: —

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteQwen3 14B
LMArena Non-English1323—
LMArena Chinese1339—
LMArena French1346—
LMArena German1306—
LMArena Japanese1302—
LMArena Korean1325—
LMArena Russian1328—
LMArena Spanish1313—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 70.6 (#158), Qwen3 14B: —

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteQwen3 14B
LiveBench Instruction Following78.3%—
IFEval82.4%—
LMArena Instruction Following1305—

Long Context Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite leads

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 40.1 (#155), Qwen3 14B: 38.0 (#201)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteQwen3 14B
Fiction.LiveBench—62.5%
LMArena Longer Query1321—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 51.9 (#172), Qwen3 14B: —

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteQwen3 14B
LMArena Text1330—
LMArena Creative Writing1319—
WildBench79%—
LMArena Multi-Turn1307—
LiveBench Language34.3%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite better than Qwen3 14B?

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.3 to 35.0 on the Noometry Index.

Is Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite or Qwen3 14B better for coding?

They score almost the same on coding (37.4 vs 36.7); test both on your own repository before choosing.

How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite and Qwen3 14B share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite has 32 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 14B has 12.

Related comparisons

Go deeper