Model comparison
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite vs Qwen3 14B
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is the stronger model overall, scoring 36.4 to 35.0 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 7 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 7 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen3 14B in 4 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3 14B leads 39.2 to 32.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Fiction.LiveBench: 47.2% for Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and 62.5% for Qwen3 14B.
- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $0.35 / $1.40 for Qwen3 14B.
- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 131K.
- Qwen3 14B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3 14B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 36.4 | 35.0 |
| Released | 2025-06-17 | 2025-04 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | 131K |
| Max output | 66K | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.10 | $0.35 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.40 | $1.40 |
| Results tracked | 33 | 12 |
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: 38.0 (#167), Qwen3 14B: 36.7 (#191)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | — | 31.6% |
| WeirdML | 35.2% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1373 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 325.9 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Qwen3 14B leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 27.8 (#89), Qwen3 14B: 29.4 (#78)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 36.9% | 41% |
Reasoning Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 21.5 (#196), Qwen3 14B: 18.1 (#272)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 40.5% | 49.1% |
| DTBench | 62.8% | 64% |
| LMCA | 18.1% | 18.2% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 133.93 | 138.23 |
| CritPt | — | 0% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 4% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1377 | — |
Math Qwen3 14B leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 35.5 (#144), Qwen3 14B: 37.0 (#102)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 66.4% |
| Omni-MATH | 48% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1373 | — |
Knowledge Qwen3 14B leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 32.1 (#206), Qwen3 14B: 39.2 (#124)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 3.3% | 5.4% |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 63.8% |
| MMLU-Pro | 53.7% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 30.9% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1373 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 28.6 (#109), Qwen3 14B: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1198 | — |
| VPCT | 30% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 49.5 (#129), Qwen3 14B: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1369 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1404 | — |
| LMArena French | 1388 | — |
| LMArena German | 1390 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1359 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1358 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1373 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1396 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 70.2 (#163), Qwen3 14B: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | 81% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1366 | — |
Long Context Qwen3 14B leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 33.3 (#257), Qwen3 14B: 38.0 (#201)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 47.2% | 62.5% |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1373 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 57.0 (#130), Qwen3 14B: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1379 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1366 | — |
| WildBench | 81.8% | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1367 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite better than Qwen3 14B?
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is the stronger model overall, scoring 36.4 to 35.0 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite or Qwen3 14B?
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Qwen3 14B lists at $0.35 and $1.40.
Is Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite or Qwen3 14B better for coding?
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.0 versus 36.7 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite does, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and Qwen3 14B share?
7 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite has 33 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 14B has 12.