Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite vs Qwen Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite comes out ahead, 83 to 69 on our weighted score, though Qwen Flash is 21% cheaper per token.
- Our pick
GoogleGemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
83/100- ECI—
- Price$0.10 / $0.40
- Context1.05M
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen Flash
69/100- ECI—
- Price$0.05 / $0.40
- Context1M
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is our pick
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is the better all-round choice, scoring 83/100 against Qwen Flash (69). It leads on inputs & features. Qwen Flash wins on price. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
- CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
- Lowest priceQwen FlashQwen Flash $0.138 · Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite $0.175 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteGemini 2.5 Flash-Lite 1,048,576 · Qwen Flash 1,000,000 tokens
- Widest inputsGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteGemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video · Qwen Flash: Text
- Self-hostingNo open weightsBoth are available only through APIs
| Measure | Weight | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Qwen Flash |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 82 | 87 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 100 | 45 |
| Context window | 20% | 61 | 60 |
| Overall | 100% | 83/100 | 69/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Gemini 2.5 Flash-LiteGoogle | Qwen FlashAlibaba (Qwen) |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.10 | $0.05 (best) |
| Output | $0.40 | $0.40 |
| Cached input | $0.01 | $0.01 |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.175 | $0.138 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Over 256K: $0.25 / $2.00 |
| Price source | Official Google API | Official Alibaba API |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 1,048,576 tokens (best) | 1,000,000 tokens |
| Max output | 65,536 tokens (best) | 32,768 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | No |
| PDFs | Yes | No |
| Audio | Yes | No |
| Video | Yes | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | Yes |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| API model ID | gemini-2.5-flash-lite | qwen-flash |
| API providers | 24 (best) | 6 |
| Released | Jun 17, 2025 | Jul 28, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Jan 2025 | Apr 2024 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite$1.80
- Qwen Flash$1.30
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite or Qwen Flash?
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is the better all-round choice, scoring 83/100 against Qwen Flash (69). It leads on inputs & features. Qwen Flash wins on price. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite or Qwen Flash?
Qwen Flash is cheaper at $0.05 input / $0.40 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite costs $0.10 input / $0.40 output per million tokens (official Google API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.138 per million tokens for Qwen Flash versus $0.175 for Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite (1.3× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite has not been scored yet and Qwen Flash has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and Qwen Flash yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 1,000,000 for Qwen Flash. Maximum output per response: Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite up to 65,536, Qwen Flash up to 32,768 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video; Qwen Flash accepts text. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
No. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and Qwen Flash are proprietary and only available through APIs and apps.
Which is newer?
Qwen Flash is the newest, released Jul 28, 2025. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite came out Jun 17, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite Jan 2025, Qwen Flash Apr 2024.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Nov 2, 2026.
Related comparisons
- Add Voxtral Small 24B 2507Three-way comparison
- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite vs Voxtral Small 24B 2507Mistral AI
- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite vs ERNIE 4.5 21B A3BBaidu
- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite vs Solar Pro 2Upstage
- Qwen Flash vs ERNIE 4.5 21B A3BBaidu
- Qwen Flash vs Apertus 8BSwiss AI
- Qwen Flash vs Mistral Small 3.2 24BMistral AI
