Model comparison
Gemma 2 9B vs Phi-2
Gemma 2 9B has enough public results to be ranked (#341); Phi-2 does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.
Google
MicrosoftSummary
- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both.
Side by side
| Gemma 2 9B | Phi-2 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Microsoft | |
| Noometry Index | 25.9 | — |
| Released | 2024-06-24 | 2023-12-12 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 35 | 11 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Gemma 2 9B: 29.4 (#304), Phi-2: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Phi-2 |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 34.7% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 22.5% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1173 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 40.6% | — |
| HumanEval+ | — | 45.1% |
| MBPP+ | — | 54.2% |
Reasoning Not comparable
Gemma 2 9B: 15.9 (#309), Phi-2: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Phi-2 |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 119.83 | 107.94 |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 15.2% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1171 | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 36.4% | — |
| Adversarial NLI | — | 42.5% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 59.4% |
| HellaSwag | — | 53.6% |
| LiveBench | 28.7% | — |
| PIQA | 83.7% | — |
| WinoGrande | — | 54.7% |
Math Not comparable
Gemma 2 9B: 9.9 (#318), Phi-2: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Phi-2 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 0.6% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 19.8% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1183 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 21% | — |
| GSM8K | 84.9% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Gemma 2 9B: 9.7 (#305), Phi-2: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Phi-2 |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU | 72.1% | 58.4% |
| GPQA Diamond | 27.5% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1147 | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 75.9% |
| BoolQ | 85.7% | — |
| OpenBookQA | — | 73.6% |
| TriviaQA | — | 45.2% |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemma 2 9B: 36.6 (#238), Phi-2: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Phi-2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1188 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1185 | — |
| LMArena French | 1190 | — |
| LMArena German | 1186 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1144 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1137 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1200 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1200 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Gemma 2 9B: 57.6 (#269), Phi-2: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Phi-2 |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 52.6% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1178 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Gemma 2 9B: 36.3 (#233), Phi-2: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Phi-2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1197 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Gemma 2 9B: 32.1 (#281), Phi-2: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Phi-2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1207 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1206 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 841 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1193 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 25.5% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 2 9B better than Phi-2?
Gemma 2 9B has enough public results to be ranked (#341); Phi-2 does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 9B and Phi-2 share?
2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 9B has 35 scored results on Noometry and Phi-2 has 11.