Model comparison
Gemini 2.0 Pro vs Qwen3.5 Max Preview
Qwen3.5 Max Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.7 to 38.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in long context, where Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads 45.2 to 29.1.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3.5 Max Preview | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 38.6 | 44.7 |
| Released | 2025-02-05 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 14 | 17 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.4 (#182), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 43.4 (#79)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 35.6% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.5% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1488 |
Reasoning Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 21.6 (#194), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 29.6 (#81)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| EnigmaEval | 0.7% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 60.1% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1483 |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 68% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.06 | — |
| LiveBench | 65.1% | — |
Math Too close to call
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.1 (#101), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 37.3 (#99)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Math | 71% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1473 |
| MATH Level 5 | 83.5% | — |
Knowledge Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#156), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 41.1 (#104)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 65.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 18.4% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1489 |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Pro: —, Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 56.4 (#21)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1465 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1534 |
| LMArena French | — | 1483 |
| LMArena German | — | 1487 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1497 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1438 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1472 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1470 |
Instruction Following Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 75.6 (#57), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 77.2 (#28)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 83.4% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1467 |
Long Context Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 29.1 (#287), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 45.2 (#44)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 41.7% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1477 |
Writing & Preference Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 52.7 (#164), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 66.1 (#39)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1471 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1464 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1478 |
| LiveBench Language | 44.9% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.0 Pro better than Qwen3.5 Max Preview?
Qwen3.5 Max Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.7 to 38.6 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 2.0 Pro or Qwen3.5 Max Preview better for coding?
Qwen3.5 Max Preview scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.4 versus 37.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Pro and Qwen3.5 Max Preview share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 Max Preview has 17.