Model comparison
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) vs Qwen2-72B
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.1 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 25 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 25 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen2-72B 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 74.4 to 61.7.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is MATH Level 5: 82.2% for Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) and 39.1% for Qwen2-72B.
- Qwen2-72B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen2-72B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 35.1 | 30.0 |
| Released | 2024-12-06 | 2024-06-07 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 54 | 26 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 28.4 (#315), Qwen2-72B: 29.1 (#310)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 25.8% | 11.3% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 45.9% | 38.5% |
| LMArena Coding | 1350 | 1196 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 59.9% | 54% |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 13.5% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 38.2% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.4% | — |
| CadEval | 30% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 28.1 (#92), Qwen2-72B: 17.0 (#146)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| TheAgentCompany | 11.4% | 1.1% |
| METR Time Horizons | — | 29.9% |
Reasoning Qwen2-72B leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 15.2 (#318), Qwen2-72B: 23.2 (#181)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1346 | 1191 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.36 | 125.28 |
| 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% | — |
| LiveBench | 66.9% | — |
Math Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 37.9 (#146), Qwen2-72B: 30.2 (#236)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1352 | 1235 |
| MATH Level 5 | 82.2% | 39.1% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 57.8% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 45.9% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 75.8% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 1.7% | — |
Knowledge Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 32.0 (#213), Qwen2-72B: 21.2 (#275)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 64.1% | 40.8% |
| LMArena Expert | 1339 | 1171 |
| MMLU | 79.7% | 82.4% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 6.6% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 73.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 12.4% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 55.6% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 36.5 (#79), Qwen2-72B: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1158 | — |
| GeoBench | 77% | — |
Multilingual Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 47.4 (#149), Qwen2-72B: 35.9 (#244)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1342 | 1176 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1373 | 1240 |
| LMArena French | 1391 | 1170 |
| LMArena German | 1353 | 1151 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1294 | 1111 |
| LMArena Korean | 1313 | 1083 |
| LMArena Russian | 1351 | 1169 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1363 | 1169 |
Instruction Following Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 74.4 (#97), Qwen2-72B: 61.7 (#241)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1336 | 1181 |
| 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 (#203), Qwen2-72B: 36.1 (#235)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1344 | 1192 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 61.1% | — |
Writing & Preference Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 49.5 (#190), Qwen2-72B: 40.8 (#241)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1354 | 1203 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1340 | 1181 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1350 | 1196 |
| 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 Qwen2-72B?
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.1 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) or Qwen2-72B better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (28.4 vs 29.1); test both on your own repository before choosing.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) and Qwen2-72B share?
25 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) has 54 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2-72B has 26.