Model comparison
Gemma 1.1 2b IT vs Qwen Max
Qwen Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.7 to 29.3 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 1.1 2b IT scores higher in 1 category and Qwen Max in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen Max leads 47.8 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 | Qwen Max | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 29.3 | 34.7 |
| Released | — | 2024-04-03 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 33K |
| Max output | — | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $1.60 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $6.40 |
| Results tracked | 16 | 23 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 30.1 (#299), Qwen Max: 30.7 (#292)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1034 | 1288 |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 21.8% |
| HumanEval+ | 17.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 23.3% | — |
Reasoning Qwen Max leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 19.1 (#270), Qwen Max: 25.1 (#151)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1005 | 1269 |
Math Gemma 1.1 2b IT leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 30.8 (#232), Qwen Max: 22.3 (#276)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1047 | 1275 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 16.1% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 67.2% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 1% |
Knowledge Qwen Max leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 26.5 (#258), Qwen Max: 30.3 (#228)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 970 | 1248 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 56.1% |
Multilingual Qwen Max leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 24.6 (#289), Qwen Max: 41.8 (#202)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 988 | 1263 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1012 | 1254 |
| LMArena German | 944 | 1254 |
| LMArena Korean | 899 | 1142 |
| LMArena Russian | 990 | 1274 |
| LMArena French | — | 1330 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1205 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1290 |
Instruction Following Qwen Max leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 49.9 (#299), Qwen Max: 66.5 (#208)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 992 | 1262 |
Long Context Qwen Max leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 30.6 (#286), Qwen Max: 39.4 (#180)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1003 | 1288 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 66.7% |
Writing & Preference Qwen Max leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 25.1 (#306), Qwen Max: 47.8 (#205)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1022 | 1282 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 998 | 1248 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 959 | 1277 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 1.1 2b IT better than Qwen Max?
Qwen Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.7 to 29.3 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemma 1.1 2b IT or Qwen Max better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (30.1 vs 30.7); test both on your own repository before choosing.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 1.1 2b IT and Qwen Max share?
14 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 1.1 2b IT has 16 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Max has 23.