Noometry

Model comparison

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite vs Qwen Turbo

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is the stronger model overall, scoring 36.4 to 26.8 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Turbo costs 2.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite Google

36.4

Rank #208 Confirmed

Qwen Turbo Alibaba (Qwen)

26.8

Rank #329 Reported

Summary

  • The widest gap is in math, where Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite leads 35.5 to 14.5.
  • Qwen Turbo is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.10 / $0.40 for Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite.
  • Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.

Side by side

Gemini 2.5 Flash-LiteQwen Turbo
ProviderGoogleAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index36.426.8
Released2025-06-172024-11-01
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1.05M1M
Max output66K16K
Input $ / M tokens$0.10$0.05
Output $ / M tokens$0.40$0.20
Results tracked333

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 38.0 (#167), Qwen Turbo: —

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteQwen Turbo
WeirdML35.2%—
LMArena Coding1373—
ALE-Bench325.9—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 27.8 (#89), Qwen Turbo: —

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteQwen Turbo
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard36.9%—

Reasoning Not comparable

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 21.5 (#196), Qwen Turbo: —

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteQwen Turbo
Kagi LLM Benchmark40.5%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1377—
DTBench62.8%—
LMCA18.1%—
Epoch Capabilities Index133.93—

Math Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 35.5 (#144), Qwen Turbo: 14.5 (#291)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteQwen Turbo
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—6.1%
Omni-MATH48%—
LMArena Math1373—
MATH Level 5—56.2%

Knowledge Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 32.1 (#206), Qwen Turbo: 22.2 (#267)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteQwen Turbo
GPQA Diamond—41.8%
MMLU-Pro53.7%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate3.3%—
GPQA (HELM)30.9%—
LMArena Expert1373—

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 28.6 (#109), Qwen Turbo: —

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteQwen Turbo
LMArena Vision1198—
VPCT30%—

Multilingual Not comparable

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 49.5 (#129), Qwen Turbo: —

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteQwen Turbo
LMArena Non-English1369—
LMArena Chinese1404—
LMArena French1388—
LMArena German1390—
LMArena Japanese1359—
LMArena Korean1358—
LMArena Russian1373—
LMArena Spanish1396—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 70.2 (#163), Qwen Turbo: —

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteQwen Turbo
IFEval81%—
LMArena Instruction Following1366—

Long Context Not comparable

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 33.3 (#257), Qwen Turbo: —

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteQwen Turbo
Fiction.LiveBench47.2%—
LMArena Longer Query1373—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 57.0 (#130), Qwen Turbo: —

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteQwen Turbo
LMArena Text1379—
LMArena Creative Writing1366—
WildBench81.8%—
LMArena Multi-Turn1367—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite better than Qwen Turbo?

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is the stronger model overall, scoring 36.4 to 26.8 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Turbo costs 2.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite or Qwen Turbo?

Qwen Turbo is cheaper. It lists at $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.20 per million output tokens; Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite lists at $0.10 and $0.40.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.

How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and Qwen Turbo share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite has 33 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Turbo has 3.

Related comparisons

Go deeper