Model comparison
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) vs Qwen1.5-110B
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.8 to 33.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 19 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen1.5-110B in 2 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in instruction following, where Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) leads 74.6 to 60.6.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is BigCodeBench Complete: 59.9% for Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) and 44.4% for Qwen1.5-110B.
- Qwen1.5-110B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen1.5-110B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 34.8 | 33.6 |
| Released | 2024-12-06 | 2024-04-25 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 54 | 20 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen1.5-110B leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 28.2 (#308), Qwen1.5-110B: 32.4 (#260)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 45.9% | 35% |
| LMArena Coding | 1351 | 1184 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 59.9% | 44.4% |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 13.5% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 38.2% | — |
| WeirdML | 25.8% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.4% | — |
| CadEval | 30% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 28.0 (#85), Qwen1.5-110B: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| TheAgentCompany | 11.4% | — |
Reasoning Qwen1.5-110B leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 15.2 (#308), Qwen1.5-110B: 21.7 (#192)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1346 | 1168 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 1.3% | — |
| SimpleBench | 31.1% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 37.8% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 1.1% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 78.2% | — |
| DTBench | 63.2% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 69.4% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.36 | — |
| ForecastBench | — | 57.7 |
| LiveBench | 66.9% | — |
Math Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 36.1 (#127), Qwen1.5-110B: 31.1 (#199)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1351 | 1185 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 57.8% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 45.9% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 75.8% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 82.2% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 1.7% | — |
Knowledge Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 32.0 (#207), Qwen1.5-110B: 30.7 (#217)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1340 | 1144 |
| GPQA Diamond | 64.1% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 6.6% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 73.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 12.4% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 55.6% | — |
| MMLU | 79.7% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 35.9 (#74), Qwen1.5-110B: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1158 | — |
| GeoBench | 77% | — |
Multilingual Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 47.6 (#144), Qwen1.5-110B: 33.8 (#245)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1342 | 1142 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1373 | 1206 |
| LMArena French | 1390 | 1150 |
| LMArena German | 1354 | 1123 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1293 | 1074 |
| LMArena Korean | 1314 | 1044 |
| LMArena Russian | 1351 | 1118 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1363 | 1141 |
Instruction Following Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 74.6 (#91), Qwen1.5-110B: 60.6 (#247)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1336 | 1158 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 85.8% | — |
| IFEval | 84.1% | — |
Long Context Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 38.1 (#198), Qwen1.5-110B: 35.0 (#237)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1345 | 1157 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 61.1% | — |
Writing & Preference Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 49.8 (#184), Qwen1.5-110B: 38.1 (#250)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1354 | 1175 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1340 | 1148 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1350 | 1160 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 73.8% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1128 | — |
| WildBench | 80% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 51.3% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) better than Qwen1.5-110B?
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.8 to 33.6 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) or Qwen1.5-110B better for coding?
Qwen1.5-110B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 32.4 versus 28.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) and Qwen1.5-110B share?
19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) has 54 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-110B has 20.