Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite vs Qwen3 14B

Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite leads Qwen3 14B on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 10.4 to 6.7, and Qwen3 14B costs 1.7x less per output token ($0.23 vs $0.40 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 16 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite Replace Qwen3 14B

Gemini 2.5 Flash LiteGoogle

Coding: No data
Overall: No data
Output $/M: $0.40

Qwen3 14BQwen

Coding: No data
Overall: No data
Output $/M: $0.23

vs boards won of 16 shared

Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite or Qwen3 14B: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite for a larger context window (1.05M against 41K tokens) and work measured by Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) or Epoch Capabilities Index, where it leads.

Model AGemini 2.5 Flash LiteGoogleNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved task Model BQwen3 14BQwenNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved task

16144

Shared results: 16
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite only: 14
Qwen3 14B only: 4
Like-for-like categories: 7 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite leads, 10.4 against 6.7.
Same board, both measured
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
No call
Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite has a GPQA Diamond result, 70.2%.
Directional only
Math
AIME
No call
Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite has a AIME result, 42.1%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
No call
Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite has a MMLU Pro result, 79.1%.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite takes 1.05M tokens against 41K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen3 14B
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite $0.0003, Qwen3 14B $0.0002 per turn.
List prices

At a glance

Coding index: Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite not benchmarked, Qwen3 14B not benchmarked.
Widest category: General, 16.6 points apart on average over 4 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap: Long context reasoning (AA-LCR): Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite 55.7% against Qwen3 14B 0.0%, 55.7 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price: Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite $0.40 against Qwen3 14B $0.23 per million output tokens, 1.7x apart.
Context window: Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite takes 1.05M tokens, Qwen3 14B 41K.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
Category	Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite	Qwen3 14B
Coding	1	1
Intelligence	1	1
Agentic work	0	2
Reasoning	2	1
Math	0	2
Knowledge	0	1
General	2	2
All shared boards	6	10

CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index11

Coding benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite and Qwen3 14B
Benchmark	Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite	Qwen3 14B	Leader
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)	71.4%	Not measured	Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)	59.3%	52.3%	Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
SciCode	Not measured	30.7%	Only Qwen3 14B measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)	4.5%	5.3%	Qwen3 14B
Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here

IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11

Intelligence benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite and Qwen3 14B
Benchmark	Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite	Qwen3 14B	Leader
AA Intelligence Index	10.4	6.7	Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
Epoch Capabilities Index	133.8	138.2	Qwen3 14B

Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02

Agentic work benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite and Qwen3 14B
Benchmark	Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite	Qwen3 14B	Leader
τ²-Bench Telecom	19.0%	34.5%	Qwen3 14B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)	36.9%	41.0%	Qwen3 14B
Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here

ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index21

Reasoning benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite and Qwen3 14B
Benchmark	Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite	Qwen3 14B	Leader
GPQA Diamond	70.2%	Not measured	Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)	75.4%	Not measured	Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)	62.5%	60.4%	Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)	6.8%	4.5%	Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)	Not measured	63.8%	Only Qwen3 14B measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark	40.5%	49.1%	Qwen3 14B
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here

MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02

Math benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite and Qwen3 14B
Benchmark	Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite	Qwen3 14B	Leader
AIME	42.1%	Not measured	Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
MGSM (Vals AI)	89.5%	Not measured	Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
AA Math Index	53.3	58.0	Qwen3 14B
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)	53.3%	58.0%	Qwen3 14B
OTIS Mock AIME	Not measured	66.4%	Only Qwen3 14B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here

KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01

Knowledge benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite and Qwen3 14B
Benchmark	Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite	Qwen3 14B	Leader
MMLU Pro	79.1%	Not measured	Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)	82.0%	Not measured	Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)	57.6%	Not measured	Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)	66.2%	Not measured	Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)	57.6%	Not measured	Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
MedQA (Vals AI)	88.9%	Not measured	Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
MedCode (Vals AI)	34.2%	Not measured	Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)	75.9%	77.4%	Qwen3 14B
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here

Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared

Web design benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite and Qwen3 14B
Benchmark	Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite	Qwen3 14B	Leader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here

GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index22

General benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite and Qwen3 14B
Benchmark	Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite	Qwen3 14B	Leader
SAGE (Vals AI)	30.8%	Not measured	Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)	75.8%	Not measured	Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured
IFBench	49.9%	40.5%	Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)	55.7%	0.0%	Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
DTBench	62.8%	64.0%	Qwen3 14B
LMCA	18.1%	18.2%	Qwen3 14B
Fiction.LiveBench	Not measured	62.5%	Only Qwen3 14B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here

Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared

Image generation benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite and Qwen3 14B
Benchmark	Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite	Qwen3 14B	Leader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite$0.0003Fits in one request

Qwen3 14B$0.0002Fits in one request

Qwen3 14B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite$0.0062Fits in one request

Qwen3 14B$0.0062Exceeds the context window

Qwen3 14B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite$0.024Fits in one request

Qwen3 14B$0.024Exceeds the context window

Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite and Qwen3 14B
Specification	Google Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite	Qwen3 14B
Maker	Google	Qwen
Weights	No public weights listed	Open weights
Released	July 22, 2025	April 28, 2025
Context window	1.05M	41K
Input $/Mtok	$0.10	$0.11
Output $/Mtok	$0.40	$0.23
Coding index	Not benchmarked	Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it	0	0
Cost per solved task	Not computable	Not computable
Source	OpenRouter listing	OpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite better than Qwen3 14B for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite for a larger context window (1.05M against 41K tokens) and work measured by Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) or Epoch Capabilities Index, where it leads.

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

Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite costs $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Qwen3 14B costs $0.11 and $0.23. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite or Qwen3 14B?

Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite, with 1.05M tokens against 41K.

How many benchmarks is the Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite vs Qwen3 14B comparison based on?

16 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen3 14B's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite or Qwen3 14B: which to pick

Which one for your work

Coding

Intelligence

Reasoning

Math

Knowledge

Long documents

Everyday cost