Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite vs Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507
Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 costs 1.9x less per output token than Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite ($0.775 vs $1.50 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 10 benchmarks have a result for both.
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite or Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507: 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 262K tokens) and work measured by τ²-Bench Telecom or DTBench, where it leads.
- Shared results
- 10
- Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite only
- 7
- Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 only
- 14
- Like-for-like categories
- 4 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 235B A22B Instruct 2507 has a AA Intelligence Index result, 12.0.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
No call
Only Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 has a Design Arena: websites result, 1058.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite takes 1.05M tokens against 262K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite $0.0010, Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 $0.0005 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite not benchmarked, Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- Agentic work, 21.9 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- IFBench: Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite 77.2% against Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 51.2%, 26.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite $1.50 against Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 $0.775 per million output tokens, 1.9x apart.
- Context window
- Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite takes 1.05M tokens, Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 262K.
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 235B A22B Instruct 2507 | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 3 | 0 | ||
| Agentic work | 0 | 1 | ||
| Reasoning | 2 | 0 | ||
| General | 3 | 1 | ||
| All shared boards | 8 | 2 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index30
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 78.8% | Only Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 measured |
| SciCode | 43.4% | 41.4% | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 24.2% | 15.2% | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite |
| WeirdML | 52.2% | 38.7% | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite |
| Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here | |||
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | Not measured | 12.0 | Only Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 measured |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 144.3 | Not measured | Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured |
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 31.3% | 53.2% | Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 |
| DeepResearch Bench | 37.3% | Not measured | Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) | Not measured | 52.1% | Only Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 measured |
| MCP Atlas | 57.1% | Not measured | Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 82.2% | 79.0% | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 17.2% | 15.9% | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 81.8% | Not measured | Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured |
| ARC-AGI | Not measured | 11.0% | Only Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 measured |
| ARC-AGI-2 | Not measured | 1.3% | Only Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 measured |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 67.2% | Not measured | Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Math Index | Not measured | 91.0 | Only Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 91.0% | Only Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 measured |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 80.0% | Not measured | Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured |
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | 27.7% | Not measured | Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 84.3% | Only Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 19 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | Not measured | 1058 | Only Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 measured |
| Design Arena: UI components | Not measured | 963 | Only Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 measured |
| Design Arena: game dev | Not measured | 951 | Only Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 measured |
| Design Arena: data viz | Not measured | 1070 | Only Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 measured |
| Design Arena: 3D | Not measured | 994 | Only Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 measured |
| Design Arena: all code categories | Not measured | 1038 | Only Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index31
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBench | 77.2% | 51.2% | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 74.3% | 72.0% | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite |
| DTBench | 76.8% | 78.4% | Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 |
| LMCA | 35.0% | 23.5% | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite |
| Neither model has a result on the other 44 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 | 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 235B A22B Instruct 2507 costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 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 235B A22B Instruct 2507 |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Qwen | |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | May 7, 2026 | July 21, 2025 |
| Context window | 1.05M | 262K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.25 | $0.145 |
| Output $/Mtok | $1.50 | $0.775 |
| 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 235B A22B Instruct 2507 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 262K tokens) and work measured by τ²-Bench Telecom or DTBench, where it leads.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite or Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507?
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite costs $0.25 per million input tokens and $1.50 per million output tokens; Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 costs $0.145 and $0.775. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite or Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507?
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks is the Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite vs Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 comparison based on?
10 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.