ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Gemini 2.5 Flash vs Qwen3 14B

Gemini 2.5 Flash comes out ahead, 68 to 54 on our weighted score, though Qwen3 14B is 28% cheaper per token.

  1. Our pick

    Google

    Gemini 2.5 Flash

    Released Jun 17, 2025

    68/100
    • ECI140.8
    • Price$0.30 / $2.50
    • Context1.05M
    Full specs Remove Gemini 2.5 Flash

  2. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3 14B

    Released Apr 29, 2025

    54/100
    • ECI138.2
    • Price$0.35 / $1.40
    • Context131K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3 14B

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Gemini 2.5 Flash is our pick

Gemini 2.5 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 68/100 against Qwen3 14B (54). It leads on capability, inputs & features and context window. Qwen3 14B wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityGemini 2.5 FlashCapabilities Index (ECI): Gemini 2.5 Flash 140.8 · Qwen3 14B 138.2
  • Lowest priceQwen3 14BQwen3 14B $0.613 · Gemini 2.5 Flash $0.85 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextGemini 2.5 FlashGemini 2.5 Flash 1,048,576 · Qwen3 14B 131,072 tokens
  • Widest inputsGemini 2.5 FlashGemini 2.5 Flash: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video · Qwen3 14B: Text
  • Self-hostingQwen3 14BPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightGemini 2.5 FlashQwen3 14B
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%6763
Price25%5360
Inputs & features15%10035
Context window10%6124
Overall100%68/10054/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Gemini 2.5 Flash vs Qwen3 14B specifications side by side
SpecificationGemini 2.5 FlashGoogleQwen3 14BAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)140.8 (best)138.2
ECI rank#97 of 148 (best)#107 of 148
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions—63.8%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics—66.4%
Price per million tokens
Input$0.30 (best)$0.35
Output$2.50$1.40 (best)
Cached input$0.03—
Blended (3:1)$0.85$0.613 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Google APIOfficial Alibaba API
Limits
Context window1,048,576 tokens (best)131,072 tokens
Max output65,536 tokens (best)8,192 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesNo
PDFsYesNo
AudioYesNo
VideoYesNo
ReasoningYesYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputYesNo
Availability
WeightsProprietaryOpen
API model IDgemini-2.5-flashqwen3-14b
API providers22 (best)1
ReleasedJun 17, 2025Apr 29, 2025
Knowledge cutoffJan 2025Apr 2025
03 — Cost

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$8.00
  • Qwen3 14B$6.30
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Gemini 2.5 Flash or Qwen3 14B?

Gemini 2.5 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 68/100 against Qwen3 14B (54). It leads on capability, inputs & features and context window. Qwen3 14B wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Flash or Qwen3 14B?

Qwen3 14B is cheaper at $0.35 input / $1.40 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). Gemini 2.5 Flash costs $0.30 input / $2.50 output per million tokens (official Google API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.613 per million tokens for Qwen3 14B versus $0.85 for Gemini 2.5 Flash (1.4× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Gemini 2.5 Flash scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Gemini 2.5 Flash 140.8 (#97 of 148) and Qwen3 14B 138.2 (#107 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (138.5–142.3 vs 133.5–140.1), so treat the gap as small.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Gemini 2.5 Flash and Qwen3 14B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Gemini 2.5 Flash leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 2.5 Flash has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 131,072 for Qwen3 14B. Maximum output per response: Gemini 2.5 Flash up to 65,536, Qwen3 14B up to 8,192 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Gemini 2.5 Flash accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video; Qwen3 14B accepts text. Gemini 2.5 Flash handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Qwen3 14B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Gemini 2.5 Flash is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Gemini 2.5 Flash is the newest, released Jun 17, 2025. Qwen3 14B came out Apr 29, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Gemini 2.5 Flash Jan 2025, Qwen3 14B Apr 2025.

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 Oct 4, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons