Model comparison
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview vs Qwen2.5 14B Instruct
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview has enough public results to be ranked (#20); Qwen2.5 14B Instruct does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in coding, where Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads 42.7 to 37.1.
- Qwen2.5 14B Instruct is cheaper at $0.35 / $1.40 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $12 for Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview.
- Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 131K.
- Qwen2.5 14B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Qwen2.5 14B Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 56.7 | 38.2 |
| Released | 2026-02-19 | 2024-09 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | 131K |
| Max output | 66K | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $2 | $0.35 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $12 | $1.40 |
| Results tracked | 71 | 3 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 42.7 (#88), Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: 37.1 (#187)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Qwen2.5 14B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | 75.6% | — |
| DeepSWE | 11.7% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1446 | — |
| SciCode | 58.9% | — |
| GSO | 22.6% | — |
| WeirdML | 72.1% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 39.8% |
| LMArena Coding | 1483 | — |
| MirrorCode | 8.9% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 52.2% |
| ALE-Bench | 1,161 | — |
| AlgoTune | 2.02 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 37.7 (#33), Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Qwen2.5 14B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 80.2% | — |
| APEX-Agents | 35.3% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 26% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 47.8% | — |
| PostTrainBench | 22% | — |
| BALROG | 57% | — |
| ExploitBench | 26.1% | — |
| GBAEval | 0.8% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 17% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1211 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 77% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 3,774 | — |
Reasoning Not comparable
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 71.7 (#9), Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Qwen2.5 14B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 77.1% | — |
| SimpleBench | 79.6% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 97.4% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 98% | — |
| CritPt | 17.7% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 55% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 36.8% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 79.4% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 14.3% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1484 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 34% | — |
| DTBench | 97.1% | — |
| LMCA | 53.8% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 154.92 | — |
| ForecastBench | 59 | — |
Math Not comparable
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 61.8 (#28), Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Qwen2.5 14B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 59.6% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 26.8% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 86.5% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 95.6% | — |
| ProofBench | 26% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1485 | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 36.9% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 16.7% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 71.8 (#3), Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Qwen2.5 14B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 94.4% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 46.4% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 73.5% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 10.4% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1484 | — |
| MMLU | — | 79.9% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 38.1 (#60), Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Qwen2.5 14B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1296 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 26.5% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 26.7% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1444 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 57.1 (#11), Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Qwen2.5 14B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1475 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1528 | — |
| LMArena French | 1488 | — |
| LMArena German | 1491 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1494 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1458 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1496 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1480 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 77.1 (#31), Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Qwen2.5 14B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1465 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 47.3 (#17), Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Qwen2.5 14B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| CL-bench | 20.8% | — |
| CL-bench Life | 16.9% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1482 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 66.3 (#36), Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Qwen2.5 14B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1480 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1482 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1491 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1142 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1486 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview better than Qwen2.5 14B Instruct?
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview has enough public results to be ranked (#20); Qwen2.5 14B Instruct does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview or Qwen2.5 14B Instruct?
Qwen2.5 14B Instruct is cheaper. It lists at $0.35 per million input tokens and $1.40 per million output tokens; Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview lists at $2 and $12.
Is Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview or Qwen2.5 14B Instruct better for coding?
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.7 versus 37.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview does, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview and Qwen2.5 14B Instruct share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview has 71 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 14B Instruct has 3.