Model comparison

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite vs Qwen3 235B-A22B

Qwen3 235B-A22B is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.2 to 36.4 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite costs 7.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3 235B-A22B's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified October 10, 2026. 30 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

Google

36.4

Rank #208 Confirmed

Qwen3 235B-A22B

Alibaba (Qwen)

43.2

Rank #83 Confirmed

Summary

They share 30 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3 235B-A22B in 8 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3 235B-A22B leads 49.5 to 32.1.
The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA (HELM): 30.9% for Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and 72.7% for Qwen3 235B-A22B.
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $0.70 / $2.80 for Qwen3 235B-A22B.
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 131K.
Qwen3 235B-A22B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and Qwen3 235B-A22B specifications
	Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite	Qwen3 235B-A22B
Provider	Google	Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index	36.4	43.2
Released	2025-06-17	2025-04
Weights	Proprietary	Open
Context window	1.05M	131K
Max output	66K	16K
Input $ / M tokens	$0.10	$0.70
Output $ / M tokens	$0.40	$2.80
Results tracked	33	49

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3 235B-A22B leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 38.0 (#167), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 43.8 (#72)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite	Qwen3 235B-A22B
WeirdML	35.2%	41%
LMArena Coding	1373	1445
Aider Polyglot	—	59.6%
SciCode	—	42.4%
ALE-Bench	325.9	—

Agentic & Tool Use Qwen3 235B-A22B leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 27.8 (#89), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 33.7 (#48)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite	Qwen3 235B-A22B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard	36.9%	52.1%
Vending-Bench 2	—	-11.34

Reasoning Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 21.5 (#196), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 15.8 (#302)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite	Qwen3 235B-A22B
Kagi LLM Benchmark	40.5%	69.4%
LMArena Hard Prompts	1377	1433
DTBench	62.8%	80.3%
LMCA	18.1%	29.3%
Epoch Capabilities Index	133.93	143.87
ARC-AGI-2	—	1.3%
SimpleBench	—	31%
ARC-AGI-1	—	11%
CritPt	—	0%
Chess Puzzles	—	12%
Mystery Game Puzzles	—	9%
ForecastBench	—	59.7

Math Qwen3 235B-A22B leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 35.5 (#144), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 48.5 (#51)

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite	Qwen3 235B-A22B
Omni-MATH	48%	71.8%
LMArena Math	1373	1431
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025	—	86.7%
MATH Level 5	—	68.9%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)	—	8.5%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)	—	0%

Knowledge Qwen3 235B-A22B leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 32.1 (#206), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 49.5 (#67)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite	Qwen3 235B-A22B
MMLU-Pro	53.7%	84.4%
Vectara Hallucination Rate	3.3%	9.3%
GPQA (HELM)	30.9%	72.7%
LMArena Expert	1373	1460
GPQA Diamond	—	80.1%
SimpleQA Verified	—	40.4%
Confabulations	—	15.6%

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 28.6 (#109), Qwen3 235B-A22B: —

Multimodal benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite	Qwen3 235B-A22B
LMArena Vision	1198	—
VPCT	30%	—

Multilingual Qwen3 235B-A22B leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 49.5 (#129), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 52.5 (#84)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite	Qwen3 235B-A22B
LMArena Non-English	1369	1410
LMArena Chinese	1404	1481
LMArena French	1388	1445
LMArena German	1390	1432
LMArena Japanese	1359	1400
LMArena Korean	1358	1391
LMArena Russian	1373	1411
LMArena Spanish	1396	1429

Instruction Following Qwen3 235B-A22B leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 70.2 (#163), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 72.8 (#132)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite	Qwen3 235B-A22B
IFEval	81%	83.5%
LMArena Instruction Following	1366	1408

Long Context Qwen3 235B-A22B leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 33.3 (#257), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 46.1 (#25)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite	Qwen3 235B-A22B
Fiction.LiveBench	47.2%	75%
LMArena Longer Query	1373	1426

Writing & Preference Qwen3 235B-A22B leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 57.0 (#130), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 59.8 (#103)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite	Qwen3 235B-A22B
LMArena Text	1379	1419
LMArena Creative Writing	1366	1384
WildBench	81.8%	86.6%
LMArena Multi-Turn	1367	1432
Short-Story Creative Writing	—	83%
EQ-Bench Creative Writing	—	1366

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite better than Qwen3 235B-A22B?

Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite or Qwen3 235B-A22B?

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Qwen3 235B-A22B lists at $0.70 and $2.80.

Is Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite or Qwen3 235B-A22B better for coding?

Qwen3 235B-A22B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.8 versus 38.0 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 235B-A22B share?

30 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite has 33 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 235B-A22B has 49.