Model comparison
Gemini 2.0 Pro vs Qwen3 235B-A22B
Qwen3 235B-A22B is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.2 to 38.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 6 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 6 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Pro scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen3 235B-A22B in 5 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in long context, where Qwen3 235B-A22B leads 46.1 to 29.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Fiction.LiveBench: 41.7% for Gemini 2.0 Pro and 75% for Qwen3 235B-A22B.
- Qwen3 235B-A22B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3 235B-A22B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 38.6 | 43.2 |
| Released | 2025-02-05 | 2025-04 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 131K |
| Max output | — | 16K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.70 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $2.80 |
| Results tracked | 14 | 49 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3 235B-A22B leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.4 (#182), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 43.8 (#72)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3 235B-A22B |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 35.6% | 59.6% |
| SciCode | — | 42.4% |
| WeirdML | — | 41% |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.5% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1445 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Pro: —, Qwen3 235B-A22B: 33.7 (#48)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3 235B-A22B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 52.1% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | -11.34 |
Reasoning Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 21.6 (#194), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 15.8 (#302)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3 235B-A22B |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.06 | 143.87 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 1.3% |
| SimpleBench | — | 31% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 69.4% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 11% |
| CritPt | — | 0% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 12% |
| EnigmaEval | 0.7% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 60.1% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1433 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 9% |
| DTBench | — | 80.3% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 68% | — |
| LMCA | — | 29.3% |
| ForecastBench | — | 59.7 |
| LiveBench | 65.1% | — |
Math Qwen3 235B-A22B leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.1 (#101), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 48.5 (#51)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3 235B-A22B |
|---|---|---|
| MATH Level 5 | 83.5% | 68.9% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 86.7% |
| Omni-MATH | — | 71.8% |
| LiveBench Math | 71% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1431 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 8.5% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 0% |
Knowledge Qwen3 235B-A22B leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#156), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 49.5 (#67)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3 235B-A22B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 65.7% | 80.1% |
| Confabulations | 18.4% | 15.6% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 40.4% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 84.4% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 9.3% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 72.7% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1460 |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Pro: —, Qwen3 235B-A22B: 52.5 (#84)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3 235B-A22B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1410 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1481 |
| LMArena French | — | 1445 |
| LMArena German | — | 1432 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1400 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1391 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1411 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1429 |
Instruction Following Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 75.6 (#57), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 72.8 (#132)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3 235B-A22B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 83.4% | — |
| IFEval | — | 83.5% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1408 |
Long Context Qwen3 235B-A22B leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 29.1 (#287), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 46.1 (#25)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3 235B-A22B |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 41.7% | 75% |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1426 |
Writing & Preference Qwen3 235B-A22B leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 52.7 (#164), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 59.8 (#103)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3 235B-A22B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1419 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1384 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 83% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1366 |
| WildBench | — | 86.6% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1432 |
| LiveBench Language | 44.9% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.0 Pro better than Qwen3 235B-A22B?
Qwen3 235B-A22B is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.2 to 38.6 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 2.0 Pro or Qwen3 235B-A22B better for coding?
Qwen3 235B-A22B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.8 versus 37.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Pro and Qwen3 235B-A22B share?
6 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 235B-A22B has 49.