Model comparison
Gemini 2.0 Pro vs Qwen3.5-9B
Gemini 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.1 to 33.8 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 2 categories and Qwen3.5-9B in 2 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.5-9B leads 46.0 to 36.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 65.7% for Gemini 2.0 Pro and 79% for Qwen3.5-9B.
- Qwen3.5-9B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3.5-9B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 39.1 | 33.8 |
| Released | 2025-02-05 | 2026-02-23 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 262K |
| Max output | — | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.10 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.15 |
| Results tracked | 14 | 10 |
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: 37.8 (#187), Qwen3.5-9B: 35.9 (#217)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 35.6% | — |
| SciCode | — | 27.5% |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.5% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Pro: —, Qwen3.5-9B: 14.5 (#151)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 9.2% |
Reasoning Too close to call
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 22.3 (#198), Qwen3.5-9B: 23.1 (#182)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.06 | 139.46 |
| CritPt | — | 0.3% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 12% |
| EnigmaEval | 0.7% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 60.1% | — |
| DTBench | — | 71.2% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 68% | — |
| LMCA | — | 24.5% |
| LiveBench | 65.1% | — |
Math Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 39.7 (#100), Qwen3.5-9B: 34.8 (#192)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 48.5% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 61.7% |
| LiveBench Math | 71% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 83.5% | — |
Knowledge Qwen3.5-9B leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#167), Qwen3.5-9B: 46.0 (#84)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 65.7% | 79% |
| Confabulations | 18.4% | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 75.5 (#59), Qwen3.5-9B: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 83.4% | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 29.2 (#292), Qwen3.5-9B: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 41.7% | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 52.7 (#165), Qwen3.5-9B: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Language | 44.9% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.0 Pro better than Qwen3.5-9B?
Gemini 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.1 to 33.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 2.0 Pro or Qwen3.5-9B better for coding?
Gemini 2.0 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.8 versus 35.9 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Pro and Qwen3.5-9B share?
2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5-9B has 10.