Model comparison
Gemini 2.0 Pro vs Qwen3.7 Flash
Gemini 2.0 Pro and Qwen3.7 Flash score almost the same on the Noometry Index (39.1 vs 39.9), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
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 1 category and Qwen3.7 Flash in 2 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.7 Flash leads 48.9 to 36.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 65.7% for Gemini 2.0 Pro and 82.3% for Qwen3.7 Flash.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3.7 Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 39.1 | 39.9 |
| Released | 2025-02-05 | 2026-07-15 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 1M |
| Max output | — | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.03 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.13 |
| Results tracked | 14 | 7 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.8 (#187), Qwen3.7 Flash: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 35.6% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.5% | — |
Reasoning Qwen3.7 Flash leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 22.3 (#198), Qwen3.7 Flash: 28.2 (#108)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.06 | 144.64 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 43.8% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 23% |
| EnigmaEval | 0.7% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 60.1% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 15% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 68% | — |
| LiveBench | 65.1% | — |
Math Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 39.7 (#100), Qwen3.7 Flash: 38.3 (#140)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 19.3% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 86.7% |
| LiveBench Math | 71% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 83.5% | — |
Knowledge Qwen3.7 Flash leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#167), Qwen3.7 Flash: 48.9 (#75)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 65.7% | 82.3% |
| Confabulations | 18.4% | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 75.5 (#59), Qwen3.7 Flash: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 83.4% | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 29.2 (#292), Qwen3.7 Flash: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 41.7% | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 52.7 (#165), Qwen3.7 Flash: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Language | 44.9% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.0 Pro better than Qwen3.7 Flash?
Gemini 2.0 Pro and Qwen3.7 Flash score almost the same on the Noometry Index (39.1 vs 39.9), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Pro and Qwen3.7 Flash share?
2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Flash has 7.