Model comparison
Gemma 2 2b IT vs Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 33.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2 2b IT scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads 49.4 to 36.5.
- Gemma 2 2b IT has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemma 2 2b IT | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 33.1 | 38.8 |
| Released | — | — |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 17 | 14 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads
Gemma 2 2b IT: 32.3 (#273), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 38.5 (#175)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1112 | 1314 |
Reasoning Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads
Gemma 2 2b IT: 21.4 (#224), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 25.9 (#141)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1113 | 1299 |
Math Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads
Gemma 2 2b IT: 32.6 (#212), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 36.1 (#174)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1135 | 1298 |
Knowledge Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads
Gemma 2 2b IT: 29.9 (#231), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 35.5 (#183)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1096 | 1289 |
Multilingual Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads
Gemma 2 2b IT: 32.3 (#257), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 41.9 (#201)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1121 | 1265 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1132 | 1314 |
| LMArena German | 1114 | 1231 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1083 | 1207 |
| LMArena Russian | 1118 | 1271 |
| LMArena French | 1157 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1055 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1140 | — |
Instruction Following Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads
Gemma 2 2b IT: 57.8 (#263), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 67.2 (#199)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1118 | 1275 |
Long Context Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads
Gemma 2 2b IT: 34.3 (#250), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 39.2 (#184)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1130 | 1292 |
Writing & Preference Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads
Gemma 2 2b IT: 36.5 (#263), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 49.4 (#192)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1156 | 1299 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1147 | 1262 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1118 | 1299 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 2 2b IT better than Qwen2.5 Plus 1127?
Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 33.1 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemma 2 2b IT or Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 better for coding?
Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.5 versus 32.3 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 2b IT and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 share?
14 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 2b IT has 17 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 has 14.