Model comparison
Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) vs Qwen3.8 27B
Qwen3.8 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.0 to 32.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 21 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.8 27B in 10 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.8 27B leads 41.0 to 12.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ARC-AGI-2: 0.8% for Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) and 42.4% for Qwen3.8 27B.
- Qwen3.8 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) | Qwen3.8 27B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 32.1 | 46.0 |
| Released | 2024-02-15 | 2026-08-14 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 262K |
| Max output | — | 33K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.04 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $2.30 |
| Results tracked | 45 | 31 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3.8 27B leads
Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024): 34.2 (#241), Qwen3.8 27B: 50.5 (#44)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1294 | 1482 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1593 |
| SciCode | — | 46.6% |
| WeirdML | 22.2% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 43.8% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 57.5% | — |
| CadEval | 34% | — |
| HumanEval+ | 79.3% | — |
| MBPP+ | 74.6% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Qwen3.8 27B leads
Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024): 17.9 (#145), Qwen3.8 27B: 32.9 (#57)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 47.5% |
| TheAgentCompany | 3.4% | — |
| Cybench | 7.5% | — |
| BALROG | 21% | — |
Reasoning Qwen3.8 27B leads
Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024): 12.3 (#338), Qwen3.8 27B: 41.0 (#54)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 0.8% | 42.4% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1296 | 1460 |
| DTBench | 59% | 88% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 131.73 | 149.38 |
| SimpleBench | 27.1% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 54.5% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 87.5% |
| CritPt | — | 5.4% |
| LMCA | — | 41.4% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 45% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 89.2% | — |
| ForecastBench | 58.4 | — |
Math Qwen3.8 27B leads
Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024): 25.8 (#266), Qwen3.8 27B: 37.1 (#161)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1315 | 1456 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 23.1% | — |
| ProofBench | — | 16% |
| Omni-MATH | 36.4% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 70.4% | — |
Knowledge Qwen3.8 27B leads
Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024): 29.4 (#239), Qwen3.8 27B: 41.6 (#109)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1279 | 1482 |
| GPQA Diamond | 57.2% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 4.6% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 73.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 13.5% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 53.4% | — |
| MMLU | 86.9% | — |
Multimodal Qwen3.8 27B leads
Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024): 36.8 (#77), Qwen3.8 27B: 41.3 (#37)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1161 | 1271 |
| Video-MME | 75% | — |
Multilingual Qwen3.8 27B leads
Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024): 45.3 (#174), Qwen3.8 27B: 53.7 (#60)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1312 | 1430 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1331 | 1504 |
| LMArena French | 1302 | 1465 |
| LMArena German | 1286 | 1438 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1292 | 1384 |
| LMArena Korean | 1298 | 1393 |
| LMArena Russian | 1320 | 1415 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1311 | 1448 |
Instruction Following Qwen3.8 27B leads
Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024): 68.6 (#185), Qwen3.8 27B: 75.8 (#53)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1297 | 1439 |
| IFEval | 83.7% | — |
Long Context Qwen3.8 27B leads
Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024): 39.8 (#169), Qwen3.8 27B: 44.3 (#70)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1308 | 1450 |
Writing & Preference Qwen3.8 27B leads
Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024): 52.4 (#172), Qwen3.8 27B: 65.8 (#43)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1319 | 1441 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1333 | 1384 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1296 | 1441 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1671 |
| WildBench | 81.3% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) better than Qwen3.8 27B?
Qwen3.8 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.0 to 32.1 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) or Qwen3.8 27B better for coding?
Qwen3.8 27B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.5 versus 34.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) and Qwen3.8 27B share?
21 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) has 45 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.8 27B has 31.