Model comparison
Gemma 2 9B vs phi-3-medium 14B
phi-3-medium 14B is the stronger model overall, scoring 29.7 to 25.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 6 shared benchmarks.
Google
MicrosoftSummary
- They share 6 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2 9B scores higher in 1 category and phi-3-medium 14B in 2 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where phi-3-medium 14B leads 27.3 to 9.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is BigCodeBench Complete: 40.6% for Gemma 2 9B and 48.7% for phi-3-medium 14B.
Side by side
| Gemma 2 9B | phi-3-medium 14B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Microsoft | |
| Noometry Index | 25.9 | 29.7 |
| Released | 2024-06-24 | 2024-04-23 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 35 | 13 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding phi-3-medium 14B leads
Gemma 2 9B: 29.4 (#304), phi-3-medium 14B: 36.8 (#201)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 34.7% | 37.6% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 40.6% | 48.7% |
| LiveBench Coding | 22.5% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1173 | — |
Reasoning Not comparable
Gemma 2 9B: 15.9 (#309), phi-3-medium 14B: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 119.83 | 121.23 |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 15.2% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1171 | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 36.4% | — |
| Adversarial NLI | — | 55.8% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 81.4% |
| HellaSwag | — | 82.4% |
| LiveBench | 28.7% | — |
| PIQA | 83.7% | — |
| WinoGrande | — | 81.5% |
Math phi-3-medium 14B leads
Gemma 2 9B: 9.9 (#318), phi-3-medium 14B: 27.3 (#250)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| MATH Level 5 | 21% | 17.6% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 0.6% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 19.8% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1183 | — |
| GSM8K | 84.9% | — |
Knowledge Too close to call
Gemma 2 9B: 9.7 (#305), phi-3-medium 14B: 9.1 (#306)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 27.5% | 27.6% |
| MMLU | 72.1% | 78% |
| LMArena Expert | 1147 | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 91.6% |
| BoolQ | 85.7% | — |
| OpenBookQA | — | 87.4% |
| TriviaQA | — | 73.9% |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemma 2 9B: 36.6 (#238), phi-3-medium 14B: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| 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-3-medium 14B: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 52.6% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1178 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Gemma 2 9B: 36.3 (#233), phi-3-medium 14B: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1197 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Gemma 2 9B: 32.1 (#281), phi-3-medium 14B: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| 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-3-medium 14B?
phi-3-medium 14B is the stronger model overall, scoring 29.7 to 25.9 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemma 2 9B or phi-3-medium 14B better for coding?
phi-3-medium 14B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 36.8 versus 29.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 9B and phi-3-medium 14B share?
6 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 9B has 35 scored results on Noometry and phi-3-medium 14B has 13.