Noometry

Model comparison

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite vs Qwen3.6 27B

Qwen3.6 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.2 to 37.0 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite costs 7.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.6 27B's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite Google

37.0

Rank #211 Confirmed

Qwen3.6 27B Alibaba (Qwen)

42.2

Rank #117 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.6 27B in 4 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.6 27B leads 52.4 to 32.5.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is LMCA: 18.1% for Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and 34.5% for Qwen3.6 27B.
  • Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $0.60 / $3.60 for Qwen3.6 27B.
  • Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 262K.
  • Qwen3.6 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemini 2.5 Flash-LiteQwen3.6 27B
ProviderGoogleAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index37.042.2
Released2025-06-172026-04-22
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1.05M262K
Max output66K66K
Input $ / M tokens$0.10$0.60
Output $ / M tokens$0.40$3.60
Results tracked3311

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

Category by category

Coding Too close to call

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 38.5 (#173), Qwen3.6 27B: 39.1 (#163)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteQwen3.6 27B
SciCode—37.3%
WeirdML35.2%—
LMArena Coding1373—
ALE-Bench325.9—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 28.0 (#96), Qwen3.6 27B: —

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteQwen3.6 27B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard36.9%—

Reasoning Qwen3.6 27B leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 22.2 (#205), Qwen3.6 27B: 25.0 (#153)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteQwen3.6 27B
DTBench62.8%78.1%
LMCA18.1%34.5%
Epoch Capabilities Index133.94146.5
Kagi LLM Benchmark40.5%—
CritPt—0.9%
Chess Puzzles—22%
LMArena Hard Prompts1377—
Mystery Game Puzzles—7%

Math Qwen3.6 27B leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 38.0 (#144), Qwen3.6 27B: 48.5 (#62)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteQwen3.6 27B
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—35.1%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—91.1%
Omni-MATH48%—
LMArena Math1373—

Knowledge Qwen3.6 27B leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 32.5 (#210), Qwen3.6 27B: 52.4 (#63)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteQwen3.6 27B
GPQA Diamond—85.9%
MMLU-Pro53.7%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate3.3%—
GPQA (HELM)30.9%—
LMArena Expert1373—

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 29.1 (#114), Qwen3.6 27B: —

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteQwen3.6 27B
LMArena Vision1198—
VPCT30%—

Multilingual Not comparable

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 49.3 (#134), Qwen3.6 27B: —

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteQwen3.6 27B
LMArena Non-English1369—
LMArena Chinese1404—
LMArena French1388—
LMArena German1389—
LMArena Japanese1359—
LMArena Korean1360—
LMArena Russian1373—
LMArena Spanish1396—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 70.0 (#168), Qwen3.6 27B: —

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteQwen3.6 27B
IFEval81%—
LMArena Instruction Following1367—

Long Context Not comparable

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 33.3 (#262), Qwen3.6 27B: —

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteQwen3.6 27B
Fiction.LiveBench47.2%—
LMArena Longer Query1373—

Writing & Preference Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite leads

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 56.8 (#135), Qwen3.6 27B: 50.3 (#181)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteQwen3.6 27B
LMArena Text1379—
LMArena Creative Writing1367—
WildBench81.8%—
EQ-Bench 4—1026
LMArena Multi-Turn1366—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite better than Qwen3.6 27B?

Qwen3.6 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.2 to 37.0 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite costs 7.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.6 27B's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite or Qwen3.6 27B?

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 27B lists at $0.60 and $3.60.

Is Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite or Qwen3.6 27B better for coding?

They score almost the same on coding (38.5 vs 39.1); test both on your own repository before choosing.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite does, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and Qwen3.6 27B share?

3 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite has 33 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 27B has 11.

Related comparisons

Go deeper