Model comparison
Gemma 1.1 2b IT vs GPT-4o
Gemma 1.1 2b IT and GPT-4o score almost the same on the Noometry Index (29.3 vs 28.6), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 1.1 2b IT scores higher in 3 categories and GPT-4o in 5 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GPT-4o leads 52.6 to 25.1.
- Gemma 1.1 2b IT has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemma 1.1 2b IT | GPT-4o | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | |
| Noometry Index | 29.3 | 28.6 |
| Released | — | 2024-05-13 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 128K |
| Max output | — | 16K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $2.50 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $10 |
| Results tracked | 16 | 72 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Gemma 1.1 2b IT leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 30.1 (#299), GPT-4o: 24.8 (#328)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | GPT-4o |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1034 | 1297 |
| HumanEval+ | 17.7% | 87.2% |
| MBPP+ | 23.3% | 72.2% |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 31% |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 21.6% |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 45.3% |
| GSO | — | 0% |
| WeirdML | — | 25.1% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 51.1% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 51.4% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 61.1% |
| CadEval | — | 26% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: —, GPT-4o: 21.0 (#141)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | GPT-4o |
|---|---|---|
| GDPval | — | 9.9% |
| TheAgentCompany | — | 8.6% |
| Cybench | — | 12.5% |
| BALROG | — | 32.3% |
| LMArena Search | — | 1006 |
| METR Time Horizons | — | 40.8% |
Reasoning Gemma 1.1 2b IT leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 19.1 (#270), GPT-4o: 9.4 (#343)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | GPT-4o |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1005 | 1281 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 0% |
| SimpleBench | — | 17.8% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 4.5% |
| CritPt | — | 0% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 13% |
| EnigmaEval | — | 0.8% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 55.8% |
| DTBench | — | 64.5% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 60.9% |
| LMCA | — | 16.6% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 128.97 |
| ForecastBench | — | 57.7 |
| LiveBench | — | 55.3% |
Math Gemma 1.1 2b IT leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 30.8 (#232), GPT-4o: 10.6 (#312)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | GPT-4o |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1047 | 1285 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 0.4% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 6.4% |
| Omni-MATH | — | 29.3% |
| LiveBench Math | — | 49.5% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 53.3% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 0.3% |
Knowledge GPT-4o leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 26.5 (#258), GPT-4o: 28.8 (#242)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | GPT-4o |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 970 | 1250 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 49.2% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | — | 2.7% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 26% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 71.3% |
| Confabulations | — | 15.3% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 9.6% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 52% |
| MMLU | — | 88.1% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: —, GPT-4o: 34.5 (#91)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | GPT-4o |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1137 |
| Video-MME | — | 71.9% |
| GeoBench | — | 71% |
| VPCT | — | 40% |
| ScienceQA | — | 88.5% |
Multilingual GPT-4o leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 24.6 (#289), GPT-4o: 43.2 (#186)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | GPT-4o |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 988 | 1283 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1012 | 1277 |
| LMArena German | 944 | 1282 |
| LMArena Korean | 899 | 1234 |
| LMArena Russian | 990 | 1286 |
| LMArena French | — | 1304 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1257 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1292 |
Instruction Following GPT-4o leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 49.9 (#299), GPT-4o: 66.6 (#207)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | GPT-4o |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 992 | 1278 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 68.6% |
| IFEval | — | 81.7% |
Long Context GPT-4o leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 30.6 (#286), GPT-4o: 39.4 (#179)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | GPT-4o |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1003 | 1289 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 66.7% |
Writing & Preference GPT-4o leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 25.1 (#306), GPT-4o: 52.6 (#166)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | GPT-4o |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1022 | 1300 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 998 | 1292 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 959 | 1302 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 81.8% |
| WildBench | — | 82.8% |
| LiveBench Language | — | 47.6% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 1.1 2b IT better than GPT-4o?
Gemma 1.1 2b IT and GPT-4o score almost the same on the Noometry Index (29.3 vs 28.6), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Is Gemma 1.1 2b IT or GPT-4o better for coding?
Gemma 1.1 2b IT scores higher on coding benchmarks: 30.1 versus 24.8 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 1.1 2b IT and GPT-4o share?
16 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 1.1 2b IT has 16 scored results on Noometry and GPT-4o has 72.