Model comparison

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite vs Qwen2.5 7B Instruct

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 to 29.0 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5 7B Instruct costs 1.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified October 10, 2026. 6 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite

Google

40.8

Rank #144 Confirmed

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct

Alibaba (Qwen)

29.0

Rank #320 Confirmed

Summary

They share 6 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
The widest gap is in math, where Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite leads 40.7 to 12.6.
The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 80% for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite and 2.5% for Qwen2.5 7B Instruct.
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is cheaper at $0.17 / $0.70 per million input/output tokens, against $0.25 / $1.50 for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite.
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 131K.
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct specifications
	Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite	Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
Provider	Google	Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index	40.8	29.0
Released	2026-03-03	2024-09
Weights	Proprietary	Open
Context window	1.05M	131K
Max output	66K	8K
Input $ / M tokens	$0.25	$0.17
Output $ / M tokens	$1.50	$0.70
Results tracked	38	15

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

Category by category

Coding Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite leads

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 37.8 (#188), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 36.5 (#208)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite	Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
LMArena WebDev	1256	—
SciCode	41.9%	—
WeirdML	52.2%	—
BigCodeBench Instruct	—	37.6%
LMArena Coding	1400	—
BigCodeBench Complete	—	46.1%
ALE-Bench	797.73	—

Agentic & Tool Use Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite leads

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 30.2 (#79), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 23.8 (#124)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite	Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
DeepResearch Bench	37.3%	—
BALROG	—	7.8%

Reasoning Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite leads

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 22.9 (#186), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 14.8 (#322)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite	Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
Chess Puzzles	25%	0%
DTBench	76.8%	47.7%
LMCA	35%	6.4%
Epoch Capabilities Index	144.47	118.51
Kagi LLM Benchmark	67.2%	—
NYT Connections (extended)	8.2%	—
CritPt	1.1%	—
EnigmaEval	3%	—
Thematic Generalization	63.3%	—
LMArena Hard Prompts	1407	—
ForecastBench	54.4	—

Math Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite leads

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 40.7 (#90), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 12.6 (#306)

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite	Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025	80%	2.5%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)	27.7%	—
Omni-MATH	—	29.4%
LMArena Math	1428	—

Knowledge Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite leads

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 41.9 (#104), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 17.0 (#286)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite	Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
GPQA Diamond	81.8%	35.5%
Humanity's Last Exam	8.6%	—
MMLU-Pro	—	53.9%
Vectara Hallucination Rate	8.2%	—
GPQA (HELM)	—	34.1%
LMArena Expert	1398	—
MMLU	—	72.9%

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 39.4 (#60), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —

Multimodal benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite	Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
LMArena Vision	1240	—

Multilingual Not comparable

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 52.3 (#86), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite	Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
LMArena Non-English	1411	—
LMArena Chinese	1461	—
LMArena French	1424	—
LMArena German	1429	—
LMArena Japanese	1413	—
LMArena Korean	1392	—
LMArena Russian	1420	—
LMArena Spanish	1421	—

Instruction Following Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite leads

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 72.7 (#131), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 63.2 (#231)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite	Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
IFEval	—	74.1%
LMArena Instruction Following	1377	—

Long Context Not comparable

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 42.5 (#122), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite	Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
LMArena Longer Query	1394	—

Writing & Preference Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite leads

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 60.9 (#94), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 48.8 (#195)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite	Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
LMArena Text	1416	—
LMArena Creative Writing	1401	—
WildBench	—	73.1%
LMArena Multi-Turn	1417	—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite better than Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?

Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is cheaper. It lists at $0.17 per million input tokens and $0.70 per million output tokens; Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite lists at $0.25 and $1.50.

Is Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct better for coding?

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.8 versus 36.5 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite does, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct share?

6 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite has 38 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has 15.