Model Comparison

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite vs Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking

Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is 9.5x cheaper per token.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

2 benchmarks

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking is better at 2 benchmarks (MMLU-Pro, SimpleQA).

Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Sun May 31 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite costs less

For input processing, Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite ($0.07/1M tokens) is 6.4x cheaper than Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking ($0.45/1M tokens).

For output processing, Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite ($0.30/1M tokens) is 11.6x cheaper than Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking ($3.49/1M tokens).

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

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

Lowest available price from all providers

Sun May 31 2026 • llm-stats.com

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite

Input tokens$0.07

Output tokens$0.30

Best providerGoogle

Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking

Input tokens$0.45

Output tokens$3.49

Best providerDeepinfra

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 VL 235B A22B Thinking's 262,144 tokens. Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking can generate longer responses up to 262,144 tokens, while Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is limited to 8,192 tokens.

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite

Input1,048,576 tokens

Output8,192 tokens

Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking

Input262,144 tokens

Output262,144 tokens

Sun May 31 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Both Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking support multimodal inputs.

They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite

Text

Images

Audio

Video

Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking

Text

Images

Audio

Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is licensed under a proprietary license, while Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking 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 VL 235B A22B Thinking

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 VL 235B A22B Thinking was released on 2025-09-22.

Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking is 8 months newer than Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite.

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite

Feb 5, 2025

1.3 years ago

Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking

Sep 22, 2025

8 months ago

7mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2024-06-01, while Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking'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 VL 235B A22B Thinking's cutoff date.

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite

Jun 2024

Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking

—

Provider Availability

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

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite

Google

Input Price:Input: $0.07/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.30/1M

Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking

Deepinfra

Input Price:Input: $0.45/1MOutput Price:Output: $3.49/1M

Novita

Input Price:Input: $0.98/1MOutput Price:Output: $3.95/1M

* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite

View details

Google

Larger context window (1,048,576 tokens)

Less expensive input tokens

Less expensive output tokens

Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking

View details

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

Has open weights

Higher MMLU-Pro score (83.8% vs 71.6%)

Higher SimpleQA score (44.4% vs 21.7%)

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature	Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite	Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking

FAQ

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

Which is better, Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite or Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking?

Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is made by Google and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.

How does Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite compare to Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking in benchmarks?

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 VL 235B A22B Thinking scores ZebraLogic: 97.3%, DocVQAtest: 96.5%, ScreenSpot: 95.4%, CountBench: 93.7%, MMLU-Redux: 93.7%.

Is Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite cheaper than Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking?

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is 6.4x cheaper for input tokens. Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite costs $0.07/M input and $0.30/M output via google. Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking costs $0.45/M input and $3.49/M output via deepinfra.

What are the context window sizes for Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking?

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite supports 1.0M tokens and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking supports 262K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking?

Key differences include context window (1.0M vs 262K), input pricing ($0.07 vs $0.45/M), licensing (Proprietary vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking?

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is developed by Google and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.