Model comparison
Gemini 2.0 Pro vs Gemma 3n E4b IT
Gemini 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.1 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- The widest gap is in long context, where Gemma 3n E4b IT leads 38.7 to 29.2.
- Gemma 3n E4b IT has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.0 Pro | Gemma 3n E4b IT | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | ||
| Noometry Index | 39.1 | 37.3 |
| Released | 2025-02-05 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 14 | 18 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.8 (#187), Gemma 3n E4b IT: 37.0 (#198)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Gemma 3n E4b IT |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 35.6% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.5% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1268 |
Reasoning Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 22.3 (#198), Gemma 3n E4b IT: 19.9 (#247)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Gemma 3n E4b IT |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 31.5% |
| EnigmaEval | 0.7% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 60.1% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1284 |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 68% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.06 | — |
| LiveBench | 65.1% | — |
Math Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 39.7 (#100), Gemma 3n E4b IT: 35.1 (#188)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Gemma 3n E4b IT |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Math | 71% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1251 |
| MATH Level 5 | 83.5% | — |
Knowledge Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#167), Gemma 3n E4b IT: 34.2 (#198)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Gemma 3n E4b IT |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 65.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 18.4% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1246 |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Pro: —, Gemma 3n E4b IT: 43.4 (#183)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Gemma 3n E4b IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1285 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1309 |
| LMArena French | — | 1330 |
| LMArena German | — | 1311 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1272 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1259 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1288 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1305 |
Instruction Following Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 75.5 (#59), Gemma 3n E4b IT: 66.1 (#210)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Gemma 3n E4b IT |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 83.4% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1255 |
Long Context Gemma 3n E4b IT leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 29.2 (#292), Gemma 3n E4b IT: 38.7 (#191)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Gemma 3n E4b IT |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 41.7% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1276 |
Writing & Preference Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 52.7 (#165), Gemma 3n E4b IT: 50.1 (#186)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Gemma 3n E4b IT |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1306 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1287 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1276 |
| LiveBench Language | 44.9% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.0 Pro better than Gemma 3n E4b IT?
Gemini 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.1 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 2.0 Pro or Gemma 3n E4b IT better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (37.8 vs 37.0); test both on your own repository before choosing.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Pro and Gemma 3n E4b IT share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and Gemma 3n E4b IT has 18.