Model comparison

Gemma 2 9B vs GPT-5.1-Codex

GPT-5.1-Codex is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 25.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 2 9B Google

25.9

Rank #341 Confirmed

GPT-5.1-Codex OpenAI

38.6

Rank #186 Reported

Summary

  • The widest gap is in math, where GPT-5.1-Codex leads 30.3 to 9.9.
  • Gemma 2 9B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemma 2 9B and GPT-5.1-Codex specifications
Gemma 2 9BGPT-5.1-Codex
ProviderGoogleOpenAI
Noometry Index25.938.6
Released2024-06-242025-11-12
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window—400K
Max output—128K
Input $ / M tokens—$1.25
Output $ / M tokens—$10
Results tracked356

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

Category by category

Coding GPT-5.1-Codex leads

Gemma 2 9B: 29.4 (#304), GPT-5.1-Codex: 41.9 (#116)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 9BGPT-5.1-Codex
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)—66%
LMArena WebDev—1337
BigCodeBench Instruct34.7%—
LiveBench Coding22.5%—
LMArena Coding1173—
BigCodeBench Complete40.6%—
ALE-Bench—1,245

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemma 2 9B: —, GPT-5.1-Codex: 38.0 (#33)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 9BGPT-5.1-Codex
Terminal-Bench—60.4%
METR Time Horizons—70.8%

Reasoning Not comparable

Gemma 2 9B: 15.9 (#309), GPT-5.1-Codex: —

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 9BGPT-5.1-Codex
LiveBench Reasoning15.2%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1171—
LiveBench Data Analysis36.4%—
Epoch Capabilities Index119.83—
LiveBench28.7%—
PIQA83.7%—

Math GPT-5.1-Codex leads

Gemma 2 9B: 9.9 (#318), GPT-5.1-Codex: 30.3 (#235)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 9BGPT-5.1-Codex
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20250.6%—
ProofBench—9%
LiveBench Math19.8%—
LMArena Math1183—
MATH Level 521%—
GSM8K84.9%—

Knowledge Not comparable

Gemma 2 9B: 9.7 (#305), GPT-5.1-Codex: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 9BGPT-5.1-Codex
GPQA Diamond27.5%—
LMArena Expert1147—
BoolQ85.7%—
MMLU72.1%—

Multilingual Not comparable

Gemma 2 9B: 36.6 (#238), GPT-5.1-Codex: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 9BGPT-5.1-Codex
LMArena Non-English1188—
LMArena Chinese1185—
LMArena French1190—
LMArena German1186—
LMArena Japanese1144—
LMArena Korean1137—
LMArena Russian1200—
LMArena Spanish1200—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Gemma 2 9B: 57.6 (#269), GPT-5.1-Codex: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 9BGPT-5.1-Codex
LiveBench Instruction Following52.6%—
LMArena Instruction Following1178—

Long Context Not comparable

Gemma 2 9B: 36.3 (#233), GPT-5.1-Codex: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 9BGPT-5.1-Codex
LMArena Longer Query1197—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Gemma 2 9B: 32.1 (#281), GPT-5.1-Codex: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 9BGPT-5.1-Codex
LMArena Text1207—
LMArena Creative Writing1206—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing841—
LMArena Multi-Turn1193—
LiveBench Language25.5%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 2 9B better than GPT-5.1-Codex?

GPT-5.1-Codex is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 25.9 on the Noometry Index.

Is Gemma 2 9B or GPT-5.1-Codex better for coding?

GPT-5.1-Codex scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.9 versus 29.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 9B and GPT-5.1-Codex share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 9B has 35 scored results on Noometry and GPT-5.1-Codex has 6.

Related comparisons

Go deeper