Model comparison
Gemini 1.0 Pro vs Qwen2.5-Max
Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.1 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 1.0 Pro scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen2.5-Max in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen2.5-Max leads 34.3 to 8.7.
Side by side
| Gemini 1.0 Pro | Qwen2.5-Max | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 27.1 | 40.1 |
| Released | 2023-12-13 | 2025-01-25 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 24 | 27 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen2.5-Max leads
Gemini 1.0 Pro: 31.6 (#270), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.2 (#118)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.0 Pro | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1108 | 1359 |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 64.4% |
| HumanEval+ | 55.5% | — |
| MBPP+ | 61.4% | — |
Reasoning Qwen2.5-Max leads
Gemini 1.0 Pro: 16.4 (#292), Qwen2.5-Max: 24.6 (#144)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.0 Pro | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1109 | 1360 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 116.97 | 132.54 |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 51.4% |
| DTBench | 45.9% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 67.9% |
| LiveBench | — | 62.3% |
Math Qwen2.5-Max leads
Gemini 1.0 Pro: 8.7 (#315), Qwen2.5-Max: 34.3 (#162)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.0 Pro | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1132 | 1369 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 1.1% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 58.4% |
| MATH Level 5 | 11.2% | — |
Knowledge Qwen2.5-Max leads
Gemini 1.0 Pro: 15.5 (#286), Qwen2.5-Max: 34.8 (#181)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.0 Pro | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1059 | 1337 |
| GPQA Diamond | 34% | — |
| Confabulations | — | 21.8% |
| MMLU | 70% | — |
Multilingual Qwen2.5-Max leads
Gemini 1.0 Pro: 33.5 (#247), Qwen2.5-Max: 48.3 (#140)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.0 Pro | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1138 | 1352 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1124 | 1382 |
| LMArena French | 1144 | 1396 |
| LMArena German | 1125 | 1350 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1023 | 1299 |
| LMArena Russian | 1186 | 1353 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1118 | 1377 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1304 |
Instruction Following Qwen2.5-Max leads
Gemini 1.0 Pro: 57.9 (#262), Qwen2.5-Max: 71.5 (#147)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.0 Pro | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1114 | 1335 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 75.3% |
Long Context Qwen2.5-Max leads
Gemini 1.0 Pro: 34.3 (#244), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.3 (#137)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.0 Pro | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1132 | 1358 |
Writing & Preference Qwen2.5-Max leads
Gemini 1.0 Pro: 36.2 (#259), Qwen2.5-Max: 55.6 (#141)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.0 Pro | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1149 | 1367 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1130 | 1339 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1139 | 1364 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 72.9% |
| LiveBench Language | — | 56.3% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 1.0 Pro better than Qwen2.5-Max?
Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.1 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 1.0 Pro or Qwen2.5-Max better for coding?
Qwen2.5-Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.2 versus 31.6 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 1.0 Pro and Qwen2.5-Max share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 1.0 Pro has 24 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Max has 27.