Noometry

Model comparison

Gemini 4 Argon vs Qwen2.5-Coder-32B

Gemini 4 Argon is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.5 to 33.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 4 Argon Google

56.5

Rank #24 Confirmed

Qwen2.5-Coder-32B Alibaba (Qwen)

33.4

Rank #245 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 4 Argon scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Gemini 4 Argon leads 73.9 to 33.3.
  • Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemini 4 ArgonQwen2.5-Coder-32B
ProviderGoogleAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index56.533.4
Released2026-09-302024-09-18
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window—33K
Max output—29K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.66
Output $ / M tokens—$1
Results tracked2131

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

Category by category

Coding Gemini 4 Argon leads

Gemini 4 Argon: 62.0 (#9), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 22.6 (#333)

BenchmarkGemini 4 ArgonQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Coding15501276
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)—9%
Aider Polyglot—16.4%
LMArena WebDev1678—
FrontierSWE55%—
SciCode61.8%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—49%
LiveBench Coding—56.9%
BigCodeBench Complete—58%
HumanEval+—87.2%
MBPP+—77%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemini 4 Argon: 49.2 (#8), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: —

BenchmarkGemini 4 ArgonQwen2.5-Coder-32B
APEX-Agents82.2%—
Vending-Bench 213,718—

Reasoning Gemini 4 Argon leads

Gemini 4 Argon: 44.2 (#47), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 21.2 (#225)

BenchmarkGemini 4 ArgonQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Hard Prompts15481251
CritPt27.1%—
LiveBench Reasoning—42.1%
LiveBench Data Analysis—49.9%
Epoch Capabilities Index—119.49
HellaSwag—83%
LiveBench—46.2%
WinoGrande—80.8%

Math Gemini 4 Argon leads

Gemini 4 Argon: 73.9 (#17), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 33.3 (#204)

BenchmarkGemini 4 ArgonQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Math15361251
ProofBench99%—
LiveBench Math—46.6%
GSM8K—93%

Knowledge Gemini 4 Argon leads

Gemini 4 Argon: 43.9 (#89), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 33.4 (#203)

BenchmarkGemini 4 ArgonQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Expert15531221
ARC (AI2) Challenge—70.5%
MMLU—79.1%

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemini 4 Argon: 46.5 (#14), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: —

BenchmarkGemini 4 ArgonQwen2.5-Coder-32B
Blueprint-Bench 254.4%—

Multilingual Gemini 4 Argon leads

Gemini 4 Argon: 60.3 (#1), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 37.8 (#235)

BenchmarkGemini 4 ArgonQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Non-English15231205
LMArena Chinese16101222
LMArena Russian15371228
LMArena Spanish1497—

Instruction Following Gemini 4 Argon leads

Gemini 4 Argon: 80.1 (#2), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 61.4 (#245)

BenchmarkGemini 4 ArgonQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Instruction Following15381223
LiveBench Instruction Following—58.7%

Long Context Gemini 4 Argon leads

Gemini 4 Argon: 47.6 (#15), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 38.0 (#208)

BenchmarkGemini 4 ArgonQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Longer Query15491251

Writing & Preference Gemini 4 Argon leads

Gemini 4 Argon: 71.4 (#19), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 41.6 (#240)

BenchmarkGemini 4 ArgonQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Text15341230
LMArena Creative Writing15311174
LMArena Multi-Turn15571222
LiveBench Language—23.3%

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemini 4 Argon better than Qwen2.5-Coder-32B?

Gemini 4 Argon is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.5 to 33.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is Gemini 4 Argon or Qwen2.5-Coder-32B better for coding?

Gemini 4 Argon scores higher on coding benchmarks: 62.0 versus 22.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Gemini 4 Argon and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 4 Argon has 21 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has 31.

Related comparisons

Go deeper