Noometry

Model comparison

Gemma 2 9B vs Qwen3.6 Plus

Qwen3.6 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.5 to 25.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 20 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 2 9B Google

25.9

Rank #341 Confirmed

Qwen3.6 Plus Alibaba (Qwen)

47.5

Rank #62 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2 9B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.6 Plus in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.6 Plus leads 56.1 to 9.7.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 0.6% for Gemma 2 9B and 93.3% for Qwen3.6 Plus.
  • Gemma 2 9B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemma 2 9BQwen3.6 Plus
ProviderGoogleAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index25.947.5
Released2024-06-242026-03-31
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window—1M
Max output—66K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.50
Output $ / M tokens—$3
Results tracked3537

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.6 Plus leads

Gemma 2 9B: 29.4 (#304), Qwen3.6 Plus: 40.8 (#130)

BenchmarkGemma 2 9BQwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Coding11731467
SWE-bench Verified—57.9%
LMArena WebDev—1461
SciCode—40.7%
BigCodeBench Instruct34.7%—
LiveBench Coding22.5%—
BigCodeBench Complete40.6%—
ALE-Bench—670.15

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemma 2 9B: —, Qwen3.6 Plus: —

BenchmarkGemma 2 9BQwen3.6 Plus
Vending-Bench 2—5,115

Reasoning Qwen3.6 Plus leads

Gemma 2 9B: 15.9 (#309), Qwen3.6 Plus: 29.3 (#93)

BenchmarkGemma 2 9BQwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Hard Prompts11711449
Epoch Capabilities Index119.83147.65
NYT Connections (extended)—60.3%
CritPt—2.9%
Chess Puzzles—17%
Thematic Generalization—59.5%
LiveBench Reasoning15.2%—
Mystery Game Puzzles—12%
DTBench—81.9%
LiveBench Data Analysis36.4%—
LMCA—33.1%
LiveBench28.7%—
PIQA83.7%—

Math Qwen3.6 Plus leads

Gemma 2 9B: 9.9 (#318), Qwen3.6 Plus: 51.8 (#54)

BenchmarkGemma 2 9BQwen3.6 Plus
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20250.6%93.3%
LMArena Math11831450
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—38.2%
LiveBench Math19.8%—
MATH Level 521%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—26.2%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—8.3%
GSM8K84.9%—

Knowledge Qwen3.6 Plus leads

Gemma 2 9B: 9.7 (#305), Qwen3.6 Plus: 56.1 (#45)

BenchmarkGemma 2 9BQwen3.6 Plus
GPQA Diamond27.5%88.4%
LMArena Expert11471454
SimpleQA Verified—44.1%
BoolQ85.7%—
MMLU72.1%—

Multilingual Qwen3.6 Plus leads

Gemma 2 9B: 36.6 (#238), Qwen3.6 Plus: 53.3 (#70)

BenchmarkGemma 2 9BQwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Non-English11881424
LMArena Chinese11851477
LMArena French11901455
LMArena German11861452
LMArena Japanese11441389
LMArena Korean11371379
LMArena Russian12001434
LMArena Spanish12001432

Instruction Following Qwen3.6 Plus leads

Gemma 2 9B: 57.6 (#269), Qwen3.6 Plus: 75.0 (#74)

BenchmarkGemma 2 9BQwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Instruction Following11781425
LiveBench Instruction Following52.6%—

Long Context Qwen3.6 Plus leads

Gemma 2 9B: 36.3 (#233), Qwen3.6 Plus: 45.2 (#49)

BenchmarkGemma 2 9BQwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Longer Query11971439
CL-bench—20.3%

Writing & Preference Qwen3.6 Plus leads

Gemma 2 9B: 32.1 (#281), Qwen3.6 Plus: 62.2 (#82)

BenchmarkGemma 2 9BQwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text12071437
LMArena Creative Writing12061404
LMArena Multi-Turn11931438
EQ-Bench Creative Writing841—
LiveBench Language25.5%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 2 9B better than Qwen3.6 Plus?

Qwen3.6 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.5 to 25.9 on the Noometry Index.

Is Gemma 2 9B or Qwen3.6 Plus better for coding?

Qwen3.6 Plus scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.8 versus 29.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 9B and Qwen3.6 Plus share?

20 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 9B has 35 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Plus has 37.

Related comparisons

Go deeper