Model comparison
Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Qwen Turbo
Gemini 2.5 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.0 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Turbo costs 39× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 2.5 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.5 Pro scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen Turbo in 0 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Gemini 2.5 Pro leads 56.0 to 22.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 84.7% for Gemini 2.5 Pro and 6.1% for Qwen Turbo.
- Qwen Turbo is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.20 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $10 for Gemini 2.5 Pro.
- Gemini 2.5 Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen Turbo | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 45.0 | 27.1 |
| Released | 2025-03-25 | 2024-11-01 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1.05M | 1M |
| Max output | 66K | 16K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.25 | $0.05 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $10 | $0.20 |
| Results tracked | 78 | 3 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 42.4 (#101), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | 57.6% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 53.6% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 83.1% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1227 | — |
| SciCode | 42.8% | — |
| GSO | 3.9% | — |
| WeirdML | 54% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 85.9% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1452 | — |
| CadEval | 64% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 785.52 | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.51 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 29.2 (#88), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 32.6% | — |
| GDPval | 23.3% | — |
| Remote Labor Index | 0.8% | — |
| TheAgentCompany | 30.3% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 13.7% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 42.8% | — |
| BALROG | 43.3% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1142 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 55.4% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 573.64 | — |
Reasoning Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 28.8 (#99), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 4.9% | — |
| SimpleBench | 62.4% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 70.3% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 41% | — |
| CritPt | 2% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 20% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 5.6% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 89.8% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1455 | — |
| DTBench | 82.4% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 79.9% | — |
| LMCA | 34.8% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 145.32 | — |
| ForecastBench | 61.3 | — |
| LiveBench | 82.3% | — |
Math Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 32.5 (#213), Qwen Turbo: 15.3 (#297)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 84.7% | 6.1% |
| MATH Level 5 | 95.9% | 56.2% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 24.6% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 0% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 41.6% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 90.2% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1450 | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 14.1% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |
Knowledge Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 56.0 (#46), Qwen Turbo: 22.2 (#272)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 85.3% | 41.8% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 21.6% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 86.3% | — |
| Confabulations | 10.6% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 7% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 74.9% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1452 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 45.2 (#18), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1263 | — |
| GeoBench | 86% | — |
| VPCT | 48% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1421 | — |
| SpatialViz-Bench | 44.7% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 55.3 (#31), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1451 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1507 | — |
| LMArena French | 1472 | — |
| LMArena German | 1487 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1461 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1434 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1461 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1473 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 75.0 (#75), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 80.6% | — |
| IFEval | 84% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1437 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 59.8 (#5), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 91.7% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1449 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 63.7 (#62), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1458 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1454 | — |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 83.8% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1421 | — |
| WildBench | 85.7% | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1453 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 67.8% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.5 Pro better than Qwen Turbo?
Gemini 2.5 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.0 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Turbo costs 39× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 2.5 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Pro or Qwen Turbo?
Qwen Turbo is cheaper. It lists at $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.20 per million output tokens; Gemini 2.5 Pro lists at $1.25 and $10.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 2.5 Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.5 Pro and Qwen Turbo share?
3 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.5 Pro has 78 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Turbo has 3.