Noometry

Model comparison

Gemini 2.0 Pro vs Qwen3.6 Max Preview

Qwen3.6 Max Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.1 to 38.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 2.0 Pro Google

38.6

Rank #171 Confirmed

Qwen3.6 Max Preview Alibaba (Qwen)

51.1

Rank #36 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Pro scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.6 Max Preview in 7 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads 57.6 to 36.5.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 65.7% for Gemini 2.0 Pro and 87.4% for Qwen3.6 Max Preview.

Side by side

Gemini 2.0 ProQwen3.6 Max Preview
ProviderGoogleAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index38.651.1
Released2025-02-052026-04-20
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window—262K
Max output—66K
Input $ / M tokens—$1.30
Output $ / M tokens—$7.80
Results tracked1429

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.4 (#182), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 48.6 (#50)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProQwen3.6 Max Preview
SWE-bench Verified—76.7%
Aider Polyglot35.6%—
LMArena WebDev—1482
LiveBench Coding63.5%—
LMArena Coding—1472

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemini 2.0 Pro: —, Qwen3.6 Max Preview: —

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProQwen3.6 Max Preview
Vending-Bench 2—4,254

Reasoning Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 21.6 (#194), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 40.8 (#47)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProQwen3.6 Max Preview
Epoch Capabilities Index135.06149.27
SimpleBench—63%
NYT Connections (extended)—74.1%
Chess Puzzles—20%
EnigmaEval0.7%—
LiveBench Reasoning60.1%—
LMArena Hard Prompts—1457
Mystery Game Puzzles—19%
DTBench—87.2%
LiveBench Data Analysis68%—
LMCA—42.5%
LiveBench65.1%—

Math Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.1 (#101), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 52.2 (#40)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProQwen3.6 Max Preview
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—91.1%
LiveBench Math71%—
LMArena Math—1465
MATH Level 583.5%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—23.1%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—4.2%

Knowledge Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#156), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 57.6 (#35)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProQwen3.6 Max Preview
GPQA Diamond65.7%87.4%
SimpleQA Verified—52%
Confabulations18.4%—
LMArena Expert—1476

Multilingual Not comparable

Gemini 2.0 Pro: —, Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 54.3 (#46)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProQwen3.6 Max Preview
LMArena Non-English—1436
LMArena Chinese—1487
LMArena French—1449
LMArena Russian—1444
LMArena Spanish—1452

Instruction Following Too close to call

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 75.6 (#57), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 75.8 (#51)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProQwen3.6 Max Preview
LiveBench Instruction Following83.4%—
LMArena Instruction Following—1437

Long Context Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 29.1 (#287), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 44.6 (#59)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProQwen3.6 Max Preview
Fiction.LiveBench41.7%—
LMArena Longer Query—1457

Writing & Preference Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 52.7 (#164), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 64.0 (#58)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProQwen3.6 Max Preview
LMArena Text—1447
LMArena Creative Writing—1435
LMArena Multi-Turn—1456
LiveBench Language44.9%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemini 2.0 Pro better than Qwen3.6 Max Preview?

Qwen3.6 Max Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.1 to 38.6 on the Noometry Index.

Is Gemini 2.0 Pro or Qwen3.6 Max Preview better for coding?

Qwen3.6 Max Preview scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.6 versus 37.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Pro and Qwen3.6 Max Preview share?

2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Max Preview has 29.

Related comparisons

Go deeper