Model comparison
Gemma 2 27B vs Qwen-14B
Qwen-14B is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.4 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2 27B scores higher in 5 categories and Qwen-14B in 2 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen-14B leads 31.2 to 10.7.
Side by side
| Gemma 2 27B | Qwen-14B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 29.4 | 31.4 |
| Released | 2024-06-24 | 2023-09-24 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 8K | — |
| Max output | 2K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.65 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.65 | — |
| Results tracked | 34 | 18 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Gemma 2 27B leads
Gemma 2 27B: 34.1 (#246), Qwen-14B: 31.2 (#288)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1211 | 1071 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 42.8% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 36% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 52.5% | — |
Reasoning Qwen-14B leads
Gemma 2 27B: 15.3 (#315), Qwen-14B: 19.6 (#257)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1198 | 1027 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 122.08 | 113.03 |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 28.1% | — |
| DTBench | 48% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 47.9% | — |
| LMCA | 7.1% | — |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 55% |
| LAMBADA | — | 71.1% |
| LiveBench | 38.2% | — |
| PIQA | — | 79.9% |
Math Qwen-14B leads
Gemma 2 27B: 10.7 (#311), Qwen-14B: 31.2 (#227)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1212 | 1068 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 1.4% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 26.5% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 27.9% | — |
| GSM8K | — | 61.3% |
Knowledge Not comparable
Gemma 2 27B: 19.0 (#280), Qwen-14B: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU | 75.7% | 66.3% |
| GPQA Diamond | 36.5% | — |
| Confabulations | 27.1% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1172 | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 84.4% |
| BoolQ | — | 86.2% |
Multilingual Gemma 2 27B leads
Gemma 2 27B: 38.6 (#226), Qwen-14B: 27.5 (#275)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1217 | 1041 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1221 | 1077 |
| LMArena French | 1247 | — |
| LMArena German | 1209 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1175 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1174 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1234 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1228 | — |
Instruction Following Gemma 2 27B leads
Gemma 2 27B: 60.5 (#249), Qwen-14B: 52.4 (#289)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1206 | 1031 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 58.1% | — |
Long Context Gemma 2 27B leads
Gemma 2 27B: 37.3 (#218), Qwen-14B: 31.3 (#280)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1231 | 1028 |
Writing & Preference Gemma 2 27B leads
Gemma 2 27B: 44.2 (#225), Qwen-14B: 27.6 (#299)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1231 | 1051 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1241 | 1028 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1224 | 1022 |
| LiveBench Language | 32.6% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 2 27B better than Qwen-14B?
Qwen-14B is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.4 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemma 2 27B or Qwen-14B better for coding?
Gemma 2 27B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.1 versus 31.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 27B and Qwen-14B share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 27B has 34 scored results on Noometry and Qwen-14B has 18.