Model comparison
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) vs Qwen2.5 14B Instruct
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) has enough public results to be ranked (#228); Qwen2.5 14B Instruct does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen2.5 14B Instruct in 1 category; one gap is clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where Qwen2.5 14B Instruct leads 37.7 to 28.4.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is BigCodeBench Complete: 59.9% for Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) and 52.2% for Qwen2.5 14B Instruct.
- Qwen2.5 14B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen2.5 14B Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 35.1 | 38.7 |
| Released | 2024-12-06 | 2024-09 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 131K |
| Max output | — | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.35 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $1.40 |
| Results tracked | 54 | 3 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen2.5 14B Instruct leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 28.4 (#315), Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: 37.7 (#191)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen2.5 14B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 45.9% | 39.8% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 59.9% | 52.2% |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 13.5% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 38.2% | — |
| WeirdML | 25.8% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.4% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1350 | — |
| CadEval | 30% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 28.1 (#92), Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen2.5 14B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| TheAgentCompany | 11.4% | — |
Reasoning Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 15.2 (#318), Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen2.5 14B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 1.3% | — |
| SimpleBench | 31.1% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 37.8% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 1.1% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 78.2% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1346 | — |
| DTBench | 63.2% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 69.4% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.36 | — |
| LiveBench | 66.9% | — |
Math Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 37.9 (#146), Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen2.5 14B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 57.8% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 45.9% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 75.8% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1352 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 82.2% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 1.7% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 32.0 (#213), Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen2.5 14B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU | 79.7% | 79.9% |
| GPQA Diamond | 64.1% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 6.6% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 73.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 12.4% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 55.6% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1339 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 36.5 (#79), Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen2.5 14B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1158 | — |
| GeoBench | 77% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 47.4 (#149), Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen2.5 14B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1342 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1373 | — |
| LMArena French | 1391 | — |
| LMArena German | 1353 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1294 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1313 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1351 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1363 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 74.4 (#97), Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen2.5 14B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 85.8% | — |
| IFEval | 84.1% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1336 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 38.1 (#203), Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen2.5 14B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 61.1% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1344 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 49.5 (#190), Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen2.5 14B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1354 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1340 | — |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 73.8% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1128 | — |
| WildBench | 80% | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1350 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 51.3% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) better than Qwen2.5 14B Instruct?
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) has enough public results to be ranked (#228); Qwen2.5 14B Instruct does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) or Qwen2.5 14B Instruct better for coding?
Qwen2.5 14B Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.7 versus 28.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) and Qwen2.5 14B Instruct share?
3 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) has 54 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 14B Instruct has 3.