Model comparison

Gemma 1.1 2b IT vs Qwen3.8 Max

Qwen3.8 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 29.3 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 1.1 2b IT Google

29.3

Rank #313 Confirmed

Qwen3.8 Max Alibaba (Qwen)

56.8

Rank #22 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 1.1 2b IT scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.8 Max in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.8 Max leads 73.2 to 30.8.
  • Gemma 1.1 2b IT has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemma 1.1 2b IT and Qwen3.8 Max specifications
Gemma 1.1 2b ITQwen3.8 Max
ProviderGoogleAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index29.356.8
Released—2026-08-02
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window—1M
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$2
Output $ / M tokens—$6
Results tracked1639

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.8 Max leads

Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 30.1 (#299), Qwen3.8 Max: 53.5 (#29)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 1.1 2b ITQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Coding10341502
DeepSWE—57.5%
LMArena WebDev—1674
FrontierSWE—17.8%
SciCode—53.2%
HumanEval+17.7%—
MBPP+23.3%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemma 1.1 2b IT: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 45.4 (#14)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 1.1 2b ITQwen3.8 Max
APEX-Agents—63.3%
τ²-bench Banking—55.1%
GDP.pdf—23.2%

Reasoning Qwen3.8 Max leads

Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 19.1 (#270), Qwen3.8 Max: 54.4 (#26)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 1.1 2b ITQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Hard Prompts10051496
NYT Connections (extended)—88.3%
CritPt—20%
Chess Puzzles—40%
Mystery Game Puzzles—38%
DTBench—92%
LMCA—46.2%
Epoch Capabilities Index—156.41

Math Qwen3.8 Max leads

Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 30.8 (#232), Qwen3.8 Max: 73.2 (#20)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 1.1 2b ITQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Math10471499
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—74.7%
FrontierMath Tier 4—46.3%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—100%
ProofBench—58%

Knowledge Qwen3.8 Max leads

Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 26.5 (#258), Qwen3.8 Max: 61.7 (#27)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 1.1 2b ITQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Expert9701507
GPQA Diamond—92.7%
SimpleQA Verified—47.3%

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemma 1.1 2b IT: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 37.2 (#75)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 1.1 2b ITQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Vision—1314
Furniture Assembly—20%

Multilingual Qwen3.8 Max leads

Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 24.6 (#289), Qwen3.8 Max: 56.7 (#18)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 1.1 2b ITQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Non-English9881472
LMArena Chinese10121538
LMArena German9441483
LMArena Korean8991461
LMArena Russian9901481
LMArena French—1503
LMArena Japanese—1467
LMArena Spanish—1492

Instruction Following Qwen3.8 Max leads

Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 49.9 (#299), Qwen3.8 Max: 77.6 (#17)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 1.1 2b ITQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Instruction Following9921479

Long Context Qwen3.8 Max leads

Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 30.6 (#286), Qwen3.8 Max: 45.6 (#31)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 1.1 2b ITQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Longer Query10031489

Writing & Preference Qwen3.8 Max leads

Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 25.1 (#306), Qwen3.8 Max: 67.1 (#30)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 1.1 2b ITQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Text10221483
LMArena Creative Writing9981479
LMArena Multi-Turn9591489

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 1.1 2b IT better than Qwen3.8 Max?

Qwen3.8 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 29.3 on the Noometry Index.

Is Gemma 1.1 2b IT or Qwen3.8 Max better for coding?

Qwen3.8 Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.5 versus 30.1 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 1.1 2b IT and Qwen3.8 Max share?

14 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 1.1 2b IT has 16 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.8 Max has 39.

Related comparisons

Go deeper