Model Comparison

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B vs Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is 10.6x cheaper per token.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

2 benchmarks

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B outperforms in 2 benchmarks (GPQA, MMLU-Pro), while Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is better at 0 benchmarks.

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Wed Apr 15 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, Qwen3.5-397B-A17B ($0.60/1M tokens) is 8.6x more expensive than Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite ($0.07/1M tokens).

For output processing, Qwen3.5-397B-A17B ($3.60/1M tokens) is 12.0x more expensive than Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite ($0.30/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Qwen3.5-397B-A17B 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
Wed Apr 15 2026 • llm-stats.com
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
Input tokens$0.60
Output tokens$3.60
Best providerNovita
Google
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite
Input tokens$0.07
Output tokens$0.30
Best providerGoogle
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 Qwen3.5-397B-A17B's 262,144 tokens. Qwen3.5-397B-A17B can generate longer responses up to 64,000 tokens, while Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is limited to 8,192 tokens.

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
Input262,144 tokens
Output64,000 tokens
Google
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output8,192 tokens
Wed Apr 15 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Both Qwen3.5-397B-A17B and Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite support multimodal inputs.

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

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B is licensed under Apache 2.0, while Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite uses a proprietary license.

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

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B was released on 2026-02-16, while Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite was released on 2025-02-05.

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B is 13 months newer than Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite.

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B

Feb 16, 2026

1 months ago

1.0yr newer
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite

Feb 5, 2025

1.2 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2024-06-01, while Qwen3.5-397B-A17B'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 Qwen3.5-397B-A17B's cutoff date.

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B

—

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite

Jun 2024

Provider Availability

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B is available from Novita. Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is available from Google.

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B

novita logo
Novita
Input Price:Input: $0.60/1MOutput Price:Output: $3.60/1M

Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite

google logo
Google
Input Price:Input: $0.07/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.30/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B

View details

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

Has open weights
Higher GPQA score (88.4% vs 51.5%)
Higher MMLU-Pro score (87.8% vs 71.6%)
Google
Larger context window (1,048,576 tokens)
Less expensive input tokens
Less expensive output tokens

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
Google
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite

FAQ

Common questions about Qwen3.5-397B-A17B vs Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Qwen3.5-397B-A17B is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team and Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is made by Google. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B scores MMLU-Redux: 94.9%, HMMT 2025: 94.8%, C-Eval: 93.0%, HMMT25: 92.7%, IFEval: 92.6%. 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%.
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is 8.6x cheaper for input tokens. Qwen3.5-397B-A17B costs $0.60/M input and $3.60/M output via novita. Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite costs $0.07/M input and $0.30/M output via google.
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B supports 262K tokens and Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite supports 1.0M tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.
Key differences include context window (262K vs 1.0M), input pricing ($0.60 vs $0.07/M), licensing (Apache 2.0 vs Proprietary). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team and Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is developed by Google.