Model comparison

Gemma 2 2b IT vs Qwen3 32B

Qwen3 32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.2 to 33.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 2 2b IT Google

33.1

Rank #248 Confirmed

Qwen3 32B Alibaba (Qwen)

39.2

Rank #172 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2 2b IT scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3 32B in 7 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen3 32B leads 52.9 to 36.5.

Side by side

Gemma 2 2b IT and Qwen3 32B specifications
Gemma 2 2b ITQwen3 32B
ProviderGoogleAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index33.139.2
Released—2025-04
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—131K
Max output—16K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.70
Output $ / M tokens—$2.80
Results tracked1726

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3 32B leads

Gemma 2 2b IT: 32.3 (#273), Qwen3 32B: 37.7 (#190)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 2b ITQwen3 32B
LMArena Coding11121358
Aider Polyglot—40%
SciCode—35.4%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemma 2 2b IT: —, Qwen3 32B: 32.6 (#62)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 2b ITQwen3 32B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—48.7%

Reasoning Gemma 2 2b IT leads

Gemma 2 2b IT: 21.4 (#224), Qwen3 32B: 20.2 (#241)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 2b ITQwen3 32B
LMArena Hard Prompts11131334
Kagi LLM Benchmark—54.9%
CritPt—0.3%
Chess Puzzles—5%
DTBench—67.5%
LMCA—17.3%
Epoch Capabilities Index—138.51

Math Qwen3 32B leads

Gemma 2 2b IT: 32.6 (#212), Qwen3 32B: 39.7 (#99)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 2b ITQwen3 32B
LMArena Math11351399
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—66.9%

Knowledge Qwen3 32B leads

Gemma 2 2b IT: 29.9 (#231), Qwen3 32B: 40.0 (#125)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 2b ITQwen3 32B
LMArena Expert10961362
GPQA Diamond—65.7%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—5.9%

Multilingual Qwen3 32B leads

Gemma 2 2b IT: 32.3 (#257), Qwen3 32B: 45.6 (#167)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 2b ITQwen3 32B
LMArena Non-English11211317
LMArena Chinese11321357
LMArena German11141341
LMArena Russian11181311
LMArena French1157—
LMArena Japanese1083—
LMArena Korean1055—
LMArena Spanish1140—

Instruction Following Qwen3 32B leads

Gemma 2 2b IT: 57.8 (#263), Qwen3 32B: 68.9 (#179)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 2b ITQwen3 32B
LMArena Instruction Following11181305

Long Context Qwen3 32B leads

Gemma 2 2b IT: 34.3 (#250), Qwen3 32B: 43.8 (#87)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 2b ITQwen3 32B
LMArena Longer Query11301327
Fiction.LiveBench—74.2%

Writing & Preference Qwen3 32B leads

Gemma 2 2b IT: 36.5 (#263), Qwen3 32B: 52.9 (#163)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 2b ITQwen3 32B
LMArena Text11561340
LMArena Creative Writing11471297
LMArena Multi-Turn11181331

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 2 2b IT better than Qwen3 32B?

Qwen3 32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.2 to 33.1 on the Noometry Index.

Is Gemma 2 2b IT or Qwen3 32B better for coding?

Qwen3 32B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.7 versus 32.3 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 2b IT and Qwen3 32B share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 2b IT has 17 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 32B has 26.

Related comparisons

Go deeper