Noometry

Model comparison

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite vs Qwen1.5-110B

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.0 to 34.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite Google

37.0

Rank #211 Confirmed

Qwen1.5-110B Alibaba (Qwen)

34.2

Rank #234 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen1.5-110B in 2 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite leads 56.8 to 38.0.
  • Qwen1.5-110B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemini 2.5 Flash-LiteQwen1.5-110B
ProviderGoogleAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index37.034.2
Released2025-06-172024-04-25
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1.05M—
Max output66K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.10—
Output $ / M tokens$0.40—
Results tracked3320

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

Category by category

Coding Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 38.5 (#173), Qwen1.5-110B: 33.0 (#264)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Coding13731184
WeirdML35.2%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—35%
BigCodeBench Complete—44.4%
ALE-Bench325.9—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 28.0 (#96), Qwen1.5-110B: —

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteQwen1.5-110B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard36.9%—

Reasoning Too close to call

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 22.2 (#205), Qwen1.5-110B: 22.7 (#189)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Hard Prompts13771168
Kagi LLM Benchmark40.5%—
DTBench62.8%—
LMCA18.1%—
Epoch Capabilities Index133.94—
ForecastBench—57.7

Math Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 38.0 (#144), Qwen1.5-110B: 33.7 (#201)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Math13731185
Omni-MATH48%—

Knowledge Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 32.5 (#210), Qwen1.5-110B: 31.2 (#219)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Expert13731144
MMLU-Pro53.7%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate3.3%—
GPQA (HELM)30.9%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 29.1 (#114), Qwen1.5-110B: —

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Vision1198—
VPCT30%—

Multilingual Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 49.3 (#134), Qwen1.5-110B: 33.6 (#250)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Non-English13691142
LMArena Chinese14041206
LMArena French13881151
LMArena German13891123
LMArena Japanese13591074
LMArena Korean13601044
LMArena Russian13731118
LMArena Spanish13961142

Instruction Following Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 70.0 (#168), Qwen1.5-110B: 60.3 (#252)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Instruction Following13671158
IFEval81%—

Long Context Qwen1.5-110B leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 33.3 (#262), Qwen1.5-110B: 35.1 (#242)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Longer Query13731157
Fiction.LiveBench47.2%—

Writing & Preference Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 56.8 (#135), Qwen1.5-110B: 38.0 (#255)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Text13791175
LMArena Creative Writing13671148
LMArena Multi-Turn13661160
WildBench81.8%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite better than Qwen1.5-110B?

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.0 to 34.2 on the Noometry Index.

Is Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite or Qwen1.5-110B better for coding?

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.5 versus 33.0 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and Qwen1.5-110B share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite has 33 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-110B has 20.

Related comparisons

Go deeper