Noometry

Model comparison

Gemini 2.0 Pro vs Qwen3.8 Max

Qwen3.8 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.0 to 38.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 2.0 Pro Google

38.6

Rank #171 Confirmed

Qwen3.8 Max Alibaba (Qwen)

56.0

Rank #21 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Pro scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.8 Max in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.8 Max leads 73.1 to 37.1.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 65.7% for Gemini 2.0 Pro and 92.7% for Qwen3.8 Max.

Side by side

Gemini 2.0 ProQwen3.8 Max
ProviderGoogleAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index38.656.0
Released2025-02-052026-08-02
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window—1M
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$2
Output $ / M tokens—$6
Results tracked1438

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.8 Max leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.4 (#182), Qwen3.8 Max: 52.3 (#30)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProQwen3.8 Max
DeepSWE—57.5%
Aider Polyglot35.6%—
LMArena WebDev—1671
FrontierSWE—15.8%
SciCode—52.9%
LiveBench Coding63.5%—
LMArena Coding—1499

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemini 2.0 Pro: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 42.6 (#17)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProQwen3.8 Max
τ²-bench Banking—55.1%
GDP.pdf—23.2%

Reasoning Qwen3.8 Max leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 21.6 (#194), Qwen3.8 Max: 53.4 (#26)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProQwen3.8 Max
Epoch Capabilities Index135.06156.69
NYT Connections (extended)—88.3%
CritPt—20%
Chess Puzzles—40%
EnigmaEval0.7%—
LiveBench Reasoning60.1%—
LMArena Hard Prompts—1493
Mystery Game Puzzles—38%
DTBench—92%
LiveBench Data Analysis68%—
LMCA—46.2%
LiveBench65.1%—

Math Qwen3.8 Max leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.1 (#101), Qwen3.8 Max: 73.1 (#15)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProQwen3.8 Max
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—74.7%
FrontierMath Tier 4—46.3%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—100%
ProofBench—58%
LiveBench Math71%—
LMArena Math—1498
MATH Level 583.5%—

Knowledge Qwen3.8 Max leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#156), Qwen3.8 Max: 61.7 (#25)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProQwen3.8 Max
GPQA Diamond65.7%92.7%
SimpleQA Verified—47.3%
Confabulations18.4%—
LMArena Expert—1504

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemini 2.0 Pro: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 36.9 (#70)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Vision—1314
Furniture Assembly—20%

Multilingual Not comparable

Gemini 2.0 Pro: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 56.6 (#18)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Non-English—1468
LMArena Chinese—1537
LMArena French—1502
LMArena German—1489
LMArena Japanese—1466
LMArena Korean—1467
LMArena Russian—1478
LMArena Spanish—1495

Instruction Following Qwen3.8 Max leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 75.6 (#57), Qwen3.8 Max: 77.7 (#19)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProQwen3.8 Max
LiveBench Instruction Following83.4%—
LMArena Instruction Following—1478

Long Context Qwen3.8 Max leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 29.1 (#287), Qwen3.8 Max: 45.5 (#30)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProQwen3.8 Max
Fiction.LiveBench41.7%—
LMArena Longer Query—1486

Writing & Preference Qwen3.8 Max leads

Gemini 2.0 Pro: 52.7 (#164), Qwen3.8 Max: 67.0 (#31)

BenchmarkGemini 2.0 ProQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Text—1480
LMArena Creative Writing—1478
LMArena Multi-Turn—1487
LiveBench Language44.9%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemini 2.0 Pro better than Qwen3.8 Max?

Qwen3.8 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.0 to 38.6 on the Noometry Index.

Is Gemini 2.0 Pro or Qwen3.8 Max better for coding?

Qwen3.8 Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 52.3 versus 37.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Pro and Qwen3.8 Max share?

2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.8 Max has 38.

Related comparisons

Go deeper