The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite vs Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking are closely matched at 10.5 and 13.0 on the LLM Stats Score. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is 1.9x cheaper per token.

Google · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking are closely matched on the overall LLM Stats Score at 10.5 and 13.0.

The models split the 2 individual benchmarks reported for both models evenly.

On price, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is roughly 1.9x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite also accepts a larger context window (1,048,576 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

  • cost matters — it's about 1.9x cheaper per token
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,048,576 token context window

Choose Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking

  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2025

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Google
Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
10.5
#262
13.0
#247
Reasoning
11.0
#256
14.1
#229
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
1 of 2
1 of 2
Input price
$0.10 / M
$0.10 / M
Output price
$0.40 / M
$1.00 / M
Context window
1,048,576
262,144

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

3 shared
Index
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking
Math
4.0#285
15.6#215
Vision
3.5#161
7.8#138
Multimodal
11.6#109
10.8#112
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

13 reported for Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite · 48 for Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking

2 shared

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite outperforms in 1 benchmarks (GPQA), while Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking is better at 1 benchmark (AIME 2025).

Both models are evenly matched across the benchmarks.

Thu Sep 10 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite costs less

For input processing, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite ($0.10/1M tokens) costs the same as Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking ($0.10/1M tokens).

For output processing, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite ($0.40/1M tokens) is 2.5x cheaper than Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking ($1.00/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking is more expensive than Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite.*

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

Lowest available price from all providers
Thu Sep 10 2026 • llm-stats.com
Google
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Input tokens$0.10
Output tokens$0.40
Best providerGoogle
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking
Input tokens$0.10
Output tokens$1.00
Best providerDeepinfra
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking's 262,144 tokens. Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking can generate longer responses up to 262,144 tokens, while Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is limited to 65,536 tokens.

Google
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output65,536 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking
Input262,144 tokens
Output262,144 tokens
Thu Sep 10 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Both Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking support multimodal inputs.

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

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License, while Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking uses Apache 2.0.

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

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License

Open weights

Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite was released on 2025-06-17, while Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking was released on 2025-09-22.

Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking is 3 months newer than Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite.

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

Jun 17, 2025

1.2 years ago

Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking

Sep 22, 2025

11 months ago

3mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2025-01-01, while Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite's training data extends to 2025-01-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking's cutoff date.

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

Jan 2025

Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking

—

Provider Availability

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is available from Google. Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking is available from DeepInfra.

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

google logo
Google
Input Price:Input: $0.10/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.40/1M

Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking

deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.10/1MOutput Price:Output: $1.00/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
✓ Preferred
Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite vs Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking.

Which is better, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite or Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking?

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking are closely matched on the LLM Stats Score at 10.5 and 13.0. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is made by Google and Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite compare to Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking in benchmarks?

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite scores FACTS Grounding: 84.1%, Global-MMLU-Lite: 81.1%, MMMU: 72.9%, GPQA: 64.6%, Vibe-Eval: 51.3%. Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking scores DocVQAtest: 94.2%, ScreenSpot: 92.9%, MMBench-V1.1: 86.7%, MMLU-Redux: 86.0%, AI2D: 84.9%.

Is Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite cheaper than Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking?

Both models cost $0.10 per million input tokens.

What are the context window sizes for Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking?

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite supports 1.0M tokens and Qwen3 VL 4B 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 2.5 Flash-Lite and Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (10.5 vs 13.0), context window (1.0M vs 262K), licensing (Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking?

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is developed by Google and Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.

Related comparisons