Model comparison
Gemma 1.1 2b IT vs Qwen3.7 Max
Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.4 to 28.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 1.1 2b IT scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.7 Max in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen3.7 Max leads 65.2 to 25.3.
- Gemma 1.1 2b IT has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Qwen3.7 Max | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 28.8 | 51.4 |
| Released | — | 2026-05-19 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 1M |
| Max output | — | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $2.50 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $7.50 |
| Results tracked | 16 | 33 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3.7 Max leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 29.6 (#294), Qwen3.7 Max: 50.2 (#43)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1034 | 1498 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 77.3% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1515 |
| SciCode | — | 48.8% |
| ALE-Bench | — | 1,189 |
| HumanEval+ | 17.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 23.3% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: —, Qwen3.7 Max: 21.8 (#129)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| GBAEval | — | 0.4% |
Reasoning Qwen3.7 Max leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 18.2 (#268), Qwen3.7 Max: 48.4 (#36)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1005 | 1483 |
| SimpleBench | — | 70.4% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 85.1% |
| CritPt | — | 13.4% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 19% |
| EBR-Bench | — | 9.5% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 32% |
| DTBench | — | 92.3% |
| LMCA | — | 44% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 153.74 |
Math Qwen3.7 Max leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 28.3 (#230), Qwen3.7 Max: 62.3 (#26)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1047 | 1488 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 64.6% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 34.1% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 95.6% |
| ProofBench | — | 26% |
Knowledge Qwen3.7 Max leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 26.0 (#255), Qwen3.7 Max: 61.7 (#24)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 970 | 1488 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 90.9% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 55.8% |
Multilingual Qwen3.7 Max leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 24.7 (#284), Qwen3.7 Max: 57.1 (#13)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 988 | 1475 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1011 | 1533 |
| LMArena Russian | 990 | 1482 |
| LMArena German | 944 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 899 | — |
Instruction Following Qwen3.7 Max leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 50.1 (#294), Qwen3.7 Max: 76.9 (#34)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 992 | 1460 |
Long Context Qwen3.7 Max leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 30.5 (#281), Qwen3.7 Max: 45.4 (#34)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1003 | 1484 |
Writing & Preference Qwen3.7 Max leads
Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 25.3 (#301), Qwen3.7 Max: 65.2 (#52)
| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1022 | 1476 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 998 | 1450 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 958 | 1482 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1110 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 1.1 2b IT better than Qwen3.7 Max?
Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.4 to 28.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemma 1.1 2b IT or Qwen3.7 Max better for coding?
Qwen3.7 Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.2 versus 29.6 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 1.1 2b IT and Qwen3.7 Max share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 1.1 2b IT has 16 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Max has 33.