Model comparison
Gemma 2 2b IT vs Qwen3.5-9B
Gemma 2 2b IT and Qwen3.5-9B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (33.1 vs 33.8), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Google
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.5-9B leads 46.0 to 29.9.
Side by side
| Gemma 2 2b IT | Qwen3.5-9B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | |
| Noometry Index | 33.1 | 33.8 |
| Released | — | 2026-02-23 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 262K |
| Max output | — | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.10 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.15 |
| Results tracked | 17 | 10 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3.5-9B leads
Gemma 2 2b IT: 32.3 (#273), Qwen3.5-9B: 35.9 (#217)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | — | 27.5% |
| LMArena Coding | 1112 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemma 2 2b IT: —, Qwen3.5-9B: 14.5 (#151)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 9.2% |
Reasoning Qwen3.5-9B leads
Gemma 2 2b IT: 21.4 (#224), Qwen3.5-9B: 23.1 (#182)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | — | 0.3% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 12% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1113 | — |
| DTBench | — | 71.2% |
| LMCA | — | 24.5% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 139.46 |
Math Qwen3.5-9B leads
Gemma 2 2b IT: 32.6 (#212), Qwen3.5-9B: 34.8 (#192)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 48.5% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 61.7% |
| LMArena Math | 1135 | — |
Knowledge Qwen3.5-9B leads
Gemma 2 2b IT: 29.9 (#231), Qwen3.5-9B: 46.0 (#84)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 79% |
| LMArena Expert | 1096 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemma 2 2b IT: 32.3 (#257), Qwen3.5-9B: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1121 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1132 | — |
| LMArena French | 1157 | — |
| LMArena German | 1114 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1083 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1055 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1118 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1140 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Gemma 2 2b IT: 57.8 (#263), Qwen3.5-9B: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1118 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Gemma 2 2b IT: 34.3 (#250), Qwen3.5-9B: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1130 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Gemma 2 2b IT: 36.5 (#263), Qwen3.5-9B: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 2b IT | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1156 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1147 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1118 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 2 2b IT better than Qwen3.5-9B?
Gemma 2 2b IT and Qwen3.5-9B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (33.1 vs 33.8), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Is Gemma 2 2b IT or Qwen3.5-9B better for coding?
Qwen3.5-9B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 35.9 versus 32.3 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 2b IT and Qwen3.5-9B share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 2b IT has 17 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5-9B has 10.