Model comparison
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite vs Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct
Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.5 to 36.4 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite costs 5.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 25 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 25 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct in 8 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct leads 41.3 to 32.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA (HELM): 30.9% for Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and 63% for Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct.
- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $0.50 / $2 for Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct.
- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 131K.
- Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 36.4 | 42.5 |
| Released | 2025-06-17 | 2025-09 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | 131K |
| Max output | 66K | 33K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.10 | $0.50 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.40 | $2 |
| Results tracked | 33 | 25 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 38.0 (#167), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 41.9 (#101)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1373 | 1441 |
| WeirdML | 35.2% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 325.9 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 27.8 (#89), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 36.9% | — |
Reasoning Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 21.5 (#196), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 30.1 (#79)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 40.5% | 66.7% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1377 | 1428 |
| DTBench | 62.8% | — |
| LMCA | 18.1% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 133.93 | — |
Math Too close to call
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 35.5 (#144), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 36.3 (#118)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Omni-MATH | 48% | 46.7% |
| LMArena Math | 1373 | 1440 |
Knowledge Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 32.1 (#206), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 41.3 (#102)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU-Pro | 53.7% | 78.6% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 3.3% | 9.3% |
| GPQA (HELM) | 30.9% | 63% |
| LMArena Expert | 1373 | 1416 |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 28.6 (#109), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1198 | — |
| VPCT | 30% | — |
Multilingual Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 49.5 (#129), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 52.3 (#88)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1369 | 1407 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1404 | 1461 |
| LMArena French | 1388 | 1415 |
| LMArena German | 1390 | 1416 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1359 | 1398 |
| LMArena Korean | 1358 | 1366 |
| LMArena Russian | 1373 | 1403 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1396 | 1436 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 70.2 (#163), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 71.0 (#154)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | 81% | 81% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1366 | 1388 |
Long Context Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 33.3 (#257), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 37.0 (#218)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 47.2% | 55.6% |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1373 | 1403 |
Writing & Preference Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 57.0 (#130), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 58.2 (#116)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1379 | 1417 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1366 | 1333 |
| WildBench | 81.8% | 80.7% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1367 | 1415 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite better than Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct?
Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.5 to 36.4 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite costs 5.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite or Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct?
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct lists at $0.50 and $2.
Is Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite or Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct better for coding?
Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.9 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-Next 80B-A3B Instruct share?
25 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite has 33 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct has 25.