Model comparison
Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Qwen3 Max
Gemini 2.5 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.9 to 43.5 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 29 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 29 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.5 Pro scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen3 Max in 1 category; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in long context, where Gemini 2.5 Pro leads 59.7 to 41.6.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Fiction.LiveBench: 91.7% for Gemini 2.5 Pro and 66.7% for Qwen3 Max.
- Qwen3 Max is cheaper at $1.20 / $6 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 262K.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen3 Max | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 44.9 | 43.5 |
| Released | 2025-03-25 | 2025-09-23 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1.05M | 262K |
| Max output | 66K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.25 | $1.20 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $10 | $6 |
| Results tracked | 78 | 33 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 42.8 (#86), Qwen3 Max: 42.4 (#93)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1452 | 1456 |
| ALE-Bench | 785.52 | 370.45 |
| 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% | — |
| CadEval | 64% | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.51 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 29.1 (#81), Qwen3 Max: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| Vending-Bench 2 | 573.64 | 71.56 |
| 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% | — |
Reasoning Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 28.8 (#85), Qwen3 Max: 22.0 (#186)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 70.3% | 72.5% |
| Chess Puzzles | 20% | 4% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1455 | 1448 |
| DTBench | 82.4% | 82.1% |
| LMCA | 34.8% | 28.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 145.32 | 142.41 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 4.9% | — |
| SimpleBench | 62.4% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 30.1% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 41% | — |
| CritPt | 2% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 5.6% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 89.8% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 5% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 79.9% | — |
| ForecastBench | 61.3 | — |
| LiveBench | 82.3% | — |
Math Qwen3 Max leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 31.9 (#191), Qwen3 Max: 37.6 (#94)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 24.6% | 18.9% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 84.7% | 73.3% |
| LMArena Math | 1450 | 1447 |
| MATH Level 5 | 95.9% | 97.1% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 0% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 41.6% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 90.2% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 14.1% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |
Knowledge Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 55.8 (#41), Qwen3 Max: 48.1 (#72)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 85.3% | 72.6% |
| LMArena Expert | 1452 | 1457 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 21.6% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 48.7% |
| MMLU-Pro | 86.3% | — |
| Confabulations | 10.6% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 7% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 74.9% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 44.5 (#16), Qwen3 Max: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1263 | — |
| GeoBench | 86% | — |
| VPCT | 48% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1421 | — |
| SpatialViz-Bench | 44.7% | — |
Multilingual Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 55.5 (#30), Qwen3 Max: 53.9 (#58)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1452 | 1429 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1507 | 1479 |
| LMArena French | 1473 | 1450 |
| LMArena German | 1487 | 1463 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1462 | 1399 |
| LMArena Korean | 1435 | 1397 |
| LMArena Russian | 1460 | 1428 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1473 | 1463 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 75.2 (#71), Qwen3 Max: 75.0 (#81)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1436 | 1420 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 80.6% | — |
| IFEval | 84% | — |
Long Context Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 59.7 (#5), Qwen3 Max: 41.6 (#129)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 91.7% | 66.7% |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1449 | 1439 |
| CL-bench | — | 14.5% |
Writing & Preference Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 63.9 (#60), Qwen3 Max: 62.6 (#72)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1458 | 1439 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1453 | 1401 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1453 | 1446 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 83.8% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1421 | — |
| WildBench | 85.7% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 67.8% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.5 Pro better than Qwen3 Max?
Gemini 2.5 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.9 to 43.5 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Pro or Qwen3 Max?
Qwen3 Max is cheaper. It lists at $1.20 per million input tokens and $6 per million output tokens; Gemini 2.5 Pro lists at $1.25 and $10.
Is Gemini 2.5 Pro or Qwen3 Max better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (42.8 vs 42.4); test both on your own repository before choosing.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 2.5 Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.5 Pro and Qwen3 Max share?
29 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.5 Pro has 78 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 Max has 33.