Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite vs Qwen3 14B
Qwen3 14B costs 6.5x less per output token than Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite ($0.23 vs $1.50 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 13 benchmarks have a result for both.
Gemini 3.1 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 3.1 Flash Lite for a larger context window (1.05M against 41K tokens) and work measured by τ²-Bench Telecom, where it leads.
- Shared results
- 13
- Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite only
- 3
- Qwen3 14B only
- 7
- Like-for-like categories
- 6 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
No call
Only Qwen3 14B has a AA Intelligence Index result, 6.7.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite takes 1.05M tokens against 41K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen3 14B
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite $0.0010, Qwen3 14B $0.0002 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite not benchmarked, Qwen3 14B not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- General, 35.2 points apart on average over 4 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- Long context reasoning (AA-LCR): Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite 74.3% against Qwen3 14B 0.0%, 74.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite $1.50 against Qwen3 14B $0.23 per million output tokens, 6.5x apart.
- Context window
- Gemini 3.1 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.
| Category | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | Bars | Qwen3 14B | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 2 | 0 | ||
| Intelligence | 1 | 0 | ||
| Agentic work | 0 | 1 | ||
| Reasoning | 4 | 0 | ||
| Math | 1 | 0 | ||
| General | 4 | 0 | ||
| All shared boards | 12 | 1 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index20
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | Qwen3 14B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 52.3% | Only Qwen3 14B measured |
| SciCode | 43.4% | 30.7% | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 24.2% | 5.3% | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite |
| WeirdML | 52.2% | Not measured | Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | Qwen3 14B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | Not measured | 6.7 | Only Qwen3 14B measured |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 144.3 | 138.2 | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite |
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | Qwen3 14B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 31.3% | 34.5% | Qwen3 14B |
| DeepResearch Bench | 37.3% | Not measured | Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) | Not measured | 41.0% | Only Qwen3 14B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | Qwen3 14B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 82.2% | 60.4% | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 17.2% | 4.5% | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 81.8% | 63.8% | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 67.2% | 49.1% | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite |
| Neither model has a result on the other 18 boards here | |||
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | Qwen3 14B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Math Index | Not measured | 58.0 | Only Qwen3 14B measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 58.0% | Only Qwen3 14B measured |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 80.0% | 66.4% | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite |
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | 27.7% | Not measured | Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | Qwen3 14B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 77.4% | Only Qwen3 14B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here | |||
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 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 index40
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | Qwen3 14B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBench | 77.2% | 40.5% | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 74.3% | 0.0% | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite |
| DTBench | 76.8% | 64.0% | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite |
| LMCA | 35.0% | 18.2% | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite |
| Fiction.LiveBench | Not measured | 62.5% | Only Qwen3 14B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 41 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 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
Qwen3 14B costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Qwen3 14B costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Qwen3 14B 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 3.1 Flash Lite | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Qwen | |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | May 7, 2026 | April 28, 2025 |
| Context window | 1.05M | 41K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.25 | $0.11 |
| Output $/Mtok | $1.50 | $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 3.1 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 3.1 Flash Lite for a larger context window (1.05M against 41K tokens) and work measured by τ²-Bench Telecom, where it leads.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite or Qwen3 14B?
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite costs $0.25 per million input tokens and $1.50 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 3.1 Flash Lite or Qwen3 14B?
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite, with 1.05M tokens against 41K.
How many benchmarks is the Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite vs Qwen3 14B comparison based on?
13 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Gemini 3.1 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.