Model Comparison

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite vs Qwen3 235B A22B

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Qwen3 235B A22B is 1.3x cheaper per token.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

3 benchmarks

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite outperforms in 3 benchmarks (GPQA, MATH, MMLU-Pro), while Qwen3 235B A22B is better at 0 benchmarks.

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Fri May 01 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Qwen3 235B A22B costs less

For input processing, Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite ($0.07/1M tokens) is 1.4x cheaper than Qwen3 235B A22B ($0.10/1M tokens).

For output processing, Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite ($0.30/1M tokens) is 3.0x more expensive than Qwen3 235B A22B ($0.10/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is more expensive than Qwen3 235B A22B.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Fri May 01 2026 • llm-stats.com
Google
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite
Input tokens$0.07
Output tokens$0.30
Best providerGoogle
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3 235B A22B
Input tokens$0.10
Output tokens$0.10
Best providerFireworks
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to Qwen3 235B A22B's 128,000 tokens. Qwen3 235B A22B can generate longer responses up to 128,000 tokens, while Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is limited to 8,192 tokens.

Google
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output8,192 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3 235B A22B
Input128,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Fri May 01 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite supports multimodal inputs, whereas Qwen3 235B A22B does not.

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Qwen3 235B A22B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is licensed under a proprietary license, while Qwen3 235B A22B uses Apache 2.0.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite

Proprietary

Closed source

Qwen3 235B A22B

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite was released on 2025-02-05, while Qwen3 235B A22B was released on 2025-04-29.

Qwen3 235B A22B is 3 months newer than Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite.

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite

Feb 5, 2025

1.2 years ago

Qwen3 235B A22B

Apr 29, 2025

1.0 years ago

2mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2024-06-01, while Qwen3 235B A22B's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite's training data extends to 2024-06-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without Qwen3 235B A22B's cutoff date.

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite

Jun 2024

Qwen3 235B A22B

—

Provider Availability

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is available from Google. Qwen3 235B A22B is available from Fireworks, DeepInfra, Novita, Together.

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite

google logo
Google
Input Price:Input: $0.07/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.30/1M

Qwen3 235B A22B

fireworks logo
Fireworks
Input Price:Input: $0.10/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.10/1M
deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.20/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.60/1M
novita logo
Novita
Input Price:Input: $0.20/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.80/1M
together logo
Together
Input Price:Input: $0.20/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.60/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Google
Larger context window (1,048,576 tokens)
Supports multimodal inputs
Less expensive input tokens
Higher GPQA score (51.5% vs 47.5%)
Higher MATH score (86.8% vs 71.8%)
Higher MMLU-Pro score (71.6% vs 68.2%)
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

Qwen3 235B A22B

View details

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

Less expensive output tokens
Has open weights

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Google
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3 235B A22B

FAQ

Common questions about Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite vs Qwen3 235B A22B

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is made by Google and Qwen3 235B A22B is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite scores MATH: 86.8%, FACTS Grounding: 83.6%, Global-MMLU-Lite: 78.2%, MMLU-Pro: 71.6%, MMMU: 68.0%. Qwen3 235B A22B scores Arena Hard: 95.6%, GSM8k: 94.4%, BBH: 88.9%, MMLU: 87.8%, MMLU-Redux: 87.4%.
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is 1.4x cheaper for input tokens. Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite costs $0.07/M input and $0.30/M output via google. Qwen3 235B A22B costs $0.10/M input and $0.10/M output via fireworks.
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite supports 1.0M tokens and Qwen3 235B A22B supports 128K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.
Key differences include context window (1.0M vs 128K), input pricing ($0.07 vs $0.10/M), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is developed by Google and Qwen3 235B A22B is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.