Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite vs Qwen3 32B
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite leads Qwen3 32B on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 10.4 to 7.3, at about the same output price ($0.40 vs $0.40 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 16 benchmarks have a result for both.
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite or Qwen3 32B: 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 131K tokens) and work measured by Epoch Capabilities Index or τ²-Bench Telecom, where it leads.
- Shared results
- 16
- Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite only
- 14
- Qwen3 32B only
- 29
- 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 7.3.
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 131K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite $0.0003, Qwen3 32B $0.0003 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite not benchmarked, Qwen3 32B not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- Math, 19.7 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- Long context reasoning (AA-LCR): Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite 55.7% against Qwen3 32B 0.0%, 55.7 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Both cost $0.40 per million output tokens.
- Context window
- Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite takes 1.05M tokens, Qwen3 32B 131K.
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.
| Category | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Bars | Qwen3 32B | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 2 | 0 | ||
| Intelligence | 1 | 1 | ||
| Agentic work | 0 | 2 | ||
| Reasoning | 0 | 3 | ||
| Math | 0 | 2 | ||
| Knowledge | 0 | 1 | ||
| General | 3 | 1 | ||
| All shared boards | 6 | 10 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index20
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3 32B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aider polyglot | Not measured | 40.0% | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | 71.4% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 59.3% | 54.6% | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite |
| SciCode | Not measured | 36.0% | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 4.5% | 3.0% | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite |
| LMArena Text: coding | Not measured | 1357 | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | Not measured | 1366 | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 32 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3 32B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 10.4 | 7.3 | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 133.8 | 138.4 | Qwen3 32B |
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3 32B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 19.0% | 29.8% | Qwen3 32B |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) | 36.9% | 48.7% | Qwen3 32B |
| BrowseComp-Plus | Not measured | 10.7% | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index03
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3 32B | 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% | 66.8% | Qwen3 32B |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 6.8% | 7.4% | Qwen3 32B |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | Not measured | 65.7% | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | Not measured | 1334 | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LMArena Text: expert | Not measured | 1362 | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | Not measured | 1350 | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 40.5% | 48.7% | Qwen3 32B |
| Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here | |||
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3 32B | 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 | 73.0 | Qwen3 32B |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | 53.3% | 73.0% | Qwen3 32B |
| OTIS Mock AIME | Not measured | 66.9% | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LMArena Text: math | Not measured | 1399 | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | Not measured | 1420 | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here | |||
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3 32B | 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% | 79.8% | Qwen3 32B |
| LMArena Text: science | Not measured | 1372 | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | Not measured | 1368 | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | Not measured | 1324 | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | Not measured | 1318 | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here | |||
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3 32B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 9 boards here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index31
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3 32B | 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% | 36.3% | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 55.7% | 0.0% | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite |
| DTBench | 62.8% | 67.5% | Qwen3 32B |
| LMCA | 18.1% | 17.3% | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite |
| Fiction.LiveBench | Not measured | 74.2% | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LMArena Text | Not measured | 1340 | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | Not measured | 1305 | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | Not measured | 1297 | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LMArena Text: English | Not measured | 1359 | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LMArena Text: non-English | Not measured | 1317 | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | Not measured | 1357 | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LMArena Text: German | Not measured | 1341 | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | Not measured | 1311 | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | Not measured | 1331 | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | Not measured | 1327 | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | Not measured | 1298 | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | Not measured | 1279 | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 27 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3 32B | 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 costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
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.
| Specification | Google Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Qwen | |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | July 22, 2025 | April 28, 2025 |
| Context window | 1.05M | 131K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.10 | $0.14 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.40 | $0.40 |
| 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 32B 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 131K tokens) and work measured by Epoch Capabilities Index or τ²-Bench Telecom, where it leads.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite or Qwen3 32B?
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite costs $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Qwen3 32B costs $0.14 and $0.40. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite or Qwen3 32B?
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks is the Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite vs Qwen3 32B comparison based on?
16 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen3 32B's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.