Model comparison
Gemini 1.0 Pro vs Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
Gemini 1.0 Pro has enough public results to be ranked (#332); Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B) does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both.
- Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B) has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 1.0 Pro | Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B) | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 27.3 | — |
| Released | 2023-12-13 | 2024-09-18 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 24 | 6 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Gemini 1.0 Pro: 32.2 (#275), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.0 Pro | Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1108 | — |
| HumanEval+ | 55.5% | — |
| MBPP+ | 61.4% | — |
Reasoning Not comparable
Gemini 1.0 Pro: 17.1 (#296), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.0 Pro | Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B) |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 117.04 | 113.14 |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1109 | — |
| DTBench | 45.9% | — |
| HellaSwag | — | 76.8% |
| WinoGrande | — | 72.9% |
Math Not comparable
Gemini 1.0 Pro: 9.3 (#321), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.0 Pro | Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B) |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 1.1% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1132 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 11.2% | — |
| GSM8K | — | 86.7% |
Knowledge Not comparable
Gemini 1.0 Pro: 15.6 (#291), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.0 Pro | Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B) |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU | 70% | 68% |
| GPQA Diamond | 34% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1059 | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 60.9% |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemini 1.0 Pro: 33.4 (#252), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.0 Pro | Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1138 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1124 | — |
| LMArena French | 1145 | — |
| LMArena German | 1125 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1023 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1186 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1119 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Gemini 1.0 Pro: 57.6 (#267), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.0 Pro | Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1114 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Gemini 1.0 Pro: 34.3 (#249), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.0 Pro | Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1132 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Gemini 1.0 Pro: 36.0 (#264), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.0 Pro | Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1149 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1131 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1139 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 1.0 Pro better than Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)?
Gemini 1.0 Pro has enough public results to be ranked (#332); Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B) does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 1.0 Pro and Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B) share?
2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 1.0 Pro has 24 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B) has 6.