Model comparison
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite vs Qwen3.7 Max
Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 41.5 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite costs 4.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.7 Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 27 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 27 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.7 Max in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.7 Max leads 62.4 to 25.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3): 26% for Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite and 64.6% for Qwen3.7 Max.
- Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite is cheaper at $0.30 / $2.50 per million input/output tokens, against $2.50 / $7.50 for Qwen3.7 Max.
- Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.
Side by side
| Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.7 Max | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 41.5 | 51.5 |
| Released | 2026-07-21 | 2026-05-19 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1.05M | 1M |
| Max output | 66K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.30 | $2.50 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.50 | $7.50 |
| Results tracked | 39 | 33 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3.7 Max leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 42.4 (#104), Qwen3.7 Max: 50.4 (#45)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1440 | 1515 |
| SciCode | 41.3% | 48.8% |
| LMArena Coding | 1453 | 1498 |
| ALE-Bench | 765.27 | 1,189 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 77.3% |
| WeirdML | 39% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 25.7 (#107), Qwen3.7 Max: 22.1 (#135)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 29.3% | — |
| GBAEval | — | 0.4% |
| GDP.pdf | 10% | — |
Reasoning Qwen3.7 Max leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 27.8 (#114), Qwen3.7 Max: 49.2 (#38)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 60.4% | 85.1% |
| CritPt | 0% | 13.4% |
| Chess Puzzles | 22% | 19% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1441 | 1483 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 19% | 32% |
| DTBench | 83.5% | 92.3% |
| LMCA | 37.6% | 44% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 145.13 | 153.68 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 10.3% | — |
| SimpleBench | — | 70.4% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 53.5% | — |
| EBR-Bench | — | 9.5% |
Math Qwen3.7 Max leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 25.9 (#264), Qwen3.7 Max: 62.4 (#32)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 26% | 64.6% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 0% | 34.1% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 71.1% | 95.6% |
| ProofBench | 13% | 26% |
| LMArena Math | 1433 | 1490 |
Knowledge Qwen3.7 Max leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 50.1 (#72), Qwen3.7 Max: 61.6 (#28)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 83.3% | 90.9% |
| LMArena Expert | 1435 | 1488 |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 55.8% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 41.1 (#40), Qwen3.7 Max: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1268 | — |
Multilingual Qwen3.7 Max leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 53.5 (#63), Qwen3.7 Max: 56.9 (#15)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1427 | 1474 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1469 | 1530 |
| LMArena Russian | 1443 | 1484 |
| LMArena French | 1451 | — |
| LMArena German | 1454 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1427 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1407 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1442 | — |
Instruction Following Qwen3.7 Max leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 74.8 (#85), Qwen3.7 Max: 76.7 (#38)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1420 | 1460 |
Long Context Qwen3.7 Max leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 43.9 (#84), Qwen3.7 Max: 45.4 (#40)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1435 | 1482 |
Writing & Preference Too close to call
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite: 64.2 (#57), Qwen3.7 Max: 65.0 (#54)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1435 | 1476 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1420 | 1449 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1445 | 1481 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1559 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1110 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite better than Qwen3.7 Max?
Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 41.5 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite costs 4.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.7 Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite or Qwen3.7 Max?
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $2.50 per million output tokens; Qwen3.7 Max lists at $2.50 and $7.50.
Is Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite or Qwen3.7 Max better for coding?
Qwen3.7 Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.4 versus 42.4 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite and Qwen3.7 Max share?
27 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite has 39 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Max has 33.