Model comparison
Gemini 2.0 Pro vs Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
Gemini 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 28.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Pro scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct in 0 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Gemini 2.0 Pro leads 37.1 to 11.8.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 65.7% for Gemini 2.0 Pro and 35.5% for Qwen2.5 7B Instruct.
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 38.6 | 28.6 |
| Released | 2025-02-05 | 2024-09 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 131K |
| Max output | — | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.17 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.70 |
| Results tracked | 14 | 15 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.4 (#182), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 35.9 (#204)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 35.6% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 37.6% |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.5% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 46.1% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Pro: —, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 23.5 (#117)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| BALROG | — | 7.8% |
Reasoning Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 21.6 (#194), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 14.3 (#317)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.06 | 118.44 |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| EnigmaEval | 0.7% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 60.1% | — |
| DTBench | — | 47.7% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 68% | — |
| LMCA | — | 6.4% |
| LiveBench | 65.1% | — |
Math Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.1 (#101), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 11.8 (#300)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 2.5% |
| Omni-MATH | — | 29.4% |
| LiveBench Math | 71% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 83.5% | — |
Knowledge Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#156), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 17.0 (#281)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 65.7% | 35.5% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 53.9% |
| Confabulations | 18.4% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 34.1% |
| MMLU | — | 72.9% |
Instruction Following Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 75.6 (#57), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 63.4 (#226)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 83.4% | — |
| IFEval | — | 74.1% |
Long Context Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 29.1 (#287), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 41.7% | — |
Writing & Preference Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 52.7 (#164), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 48.8 (#194)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| WildBench | — | 73.1% |
| LiveBench Language | 44.9% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.0 Pro better than Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?
Gemini 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 28.6 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 2.0 Pro or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct better for coding?
Gemini 2.0 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.4 versus 35.9 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Pro and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct share?
2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has 15.