Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite vs Qwen3.8 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite and Qwen3.8 Flash cost about the same per output token ($0.40 vs $0.47 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $0.40
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $0.47
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite or Qwen3.8 Flash: 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 output tokens 1.2x cheaper ($0.40 vs $0.47 per million) and a larger context window (1.05M against 1M tokens).
No benchmark has tested both yet. Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite has results on LiveCodeBench (Vals AI), LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) and Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run); Qwen3.8 Flash on LiveBench coding, LiveBench research and LiveBench browser. Compare them on price and context instead.
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
No call
Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite has a AA Intelligence Index result, 10.4.
Directional only
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 1M.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite $0.0003, Qwen3.8 Flash $0.0004 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite not benchmarked, Qwen3.8 Flash not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- None yet: no category has been tested on both models.
- Widest single gap
- None yet: no benchmark has tested both models.
- Output price
- Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite $0.40 against Qwen3.8 Flash $0.47 per million output tokens, 1.2x apart.
- Context window
- Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite takes 1.05M tokens, Qwen3.8 Flash 1M.
Benchmark by benchmark
Every board either model has a result on, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale. Only one model is measured on each, so no row names a leader.
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index4 boards measured
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.8 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench coding | Not measured | 87.4% | Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | 71.4% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 59.3% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 4.5% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here | |||
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.8 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 10.4 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 133.8 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards measured
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.8 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench research | Not measured | 74.6% | Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured |
| LiveBench browser | Not measured | 48.0% | Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured |
| LiveBench long agentic | Not measured | 37.1% | Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 19.0% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) | 36.9% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 36 boards here | |||
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards measured
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.8 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 70.2% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| LiveBench reasoning | Not measured | 87.4% | Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured |
| MMMU Pro (Vals AI) | 75.4% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 62.5% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 6.8% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 40.5% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards measured
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.8 Flash | 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 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | 53.3% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards measured
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.8 Flash | 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% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.8 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench design | Not measured | 72.8% | Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here | |||
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards measured
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Qwen3.8 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench data analysis | Not measured | 74.2% | Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured |
| 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% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 55.7% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| DTBench | 62.8% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| LMCA | 18.1% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 39 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 | Qwen3.8 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Qwen | |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | July 22, 2025 | August 26, 2026 |
| Context window | 1.05M | 1M |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.10 | $0.15 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.40 | $0.47 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 1 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite better than Qwen3.8 Flash for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite for output tokens 1.2x cheaper ($0.40 vs $0.47 per million) and a larger context window (1.05M against 1M tokens).
Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite or Qwen3.8 Flash?
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite costs $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Qwen3.8 Flash costs $0.15 and $0.47. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite or Qwen3.8 Flash?
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.
Has any benchmark tested both Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite and Qwen3.8 Flash?
No benchmark has tested both yet. Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite has results on LiveCodeBench (Vals AI), LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) and Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run); Qwen3.8 Flash on LiveBench coding, LiveBench research and LiveBench browser. Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 21, 2026.