# Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite vs Qwen3 14B

> Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.0 to 35.5 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemini-2-5-flash-lite-vs-qwen3-14b
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 7

## Summary

- They share 7 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen3 14B in 4 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3 14B leads 39.3 to 32.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Fiction.LiveBench: 47.2% for Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and 62.5% for Qwen3 14B.
- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $0.35 / $1.40 for Qwen3 14B.
- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 131K.
- Qwen3 14B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 37.0 | 35.5 |
| Rank | 211 | 225 |
| Context | 1.05M | 131K |
| Input $/M | $0.10 | $0.35 |
| Output $/M | $0.40 | $1.40 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 38.5 (#173)
- Qwen3 14B: 37.3 (#195)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | — | 31.6% |
| WeirdML | 35.2% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1373 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 325.9 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 28.0 (#96)
- Qwen3 14B: 29.6 (#83)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 36.9% | 41% |

## Reasoning

- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 22.2 (#205)
- Qwen3 14B: 18.5 (#280)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 40.5% | 49.1% |
| DTBench | 62.8% | 64% |
| LMCA | 18.1% | 18.2% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 133.94 | 138.23 |
| CritPt | — | 0% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 4% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1377 | — |

## Math

- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 38.0 (#144)
- Qwen3 14B: 38.6 (#133)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 66.4% |
| Omni-MATH | 48% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1373 | — |

## Knowledge

- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 32.5 (#210)
- Qwen3 14B: 39.3 (#134)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 3.3% | 5.4% |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 63.8% |
| MMLU-Pro | 53.7% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 30.9% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1373 | — |

## Multimodal

- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 29.1 (#114)
- Qwen3 14B: —

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1198 | — |
| VPCT | 30% | — |

## Multilingual

- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 49.3 (#134)
- Qwen3 14B: —

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1369 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1404 | — |
| LMArena French | 1388 | — |
| LMArena German | 1389 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1359 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1360 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1373 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1396 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 70.0 (#168)
- Qwen3 14B: —

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | 81% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1367 | — |

## Long Context

- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 33.3 (#262)
- Qwen3 14B: 38.1 (#204)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 47.2% | 62.5% |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1373 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 56.8 (#135)
- Qwen3 14B: —

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1379 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1367 | — |
| WildBench | 81.8% | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1366 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite better than Qwen3 14B?

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.0 to 35.5 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite or Qwen3 14B?

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Qwen3 14B lists at $0.35 and $1.40.

### Is Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite or Qwen3 14B better for coding?

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.5 versus 37.3 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 14B share?

7 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite has 33 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 14B has 12.