Model comparison
Gemma 2B vs GPT-4o
Gemma 2B and GPT-4o score almost the same on the Noometry Index (29.1 vs 28.5), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2B scores higher in 3 categories and GPT-4o in 4 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GPT-4o leads 52.8 to 24.1.
- Gemma 2B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemma 2B | GPT-4o | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | |
| Noometry Index | 29.1 | 28.5 |
| Released | 2024-02-21 | 2024-05-13 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 128K |
| Max output | — | 16K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $2.50 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $10 |
| Results tracked | 23 | 72 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Gemma 2B leads
Gemma 2B: 28.9 (#300), GPT-4o: 25.1 (#323)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GPT-4o |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1010 | 1297 |
| HumanEval+ | 20.7% | 87.2% |
| MBPP+ | 34.1% | 72.2% |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 31% |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 21.6% |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 45.3% |
| GSO | — | 0% |
| WeirdML | — | 25.1% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 51.1% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 51.4% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 61.1% |
| CadEval | — | 26% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemma 2B: —, GPT-4o: 20.8 (#133)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GPT-4o |
|---|---|---|
| GDPval | — | 9.9% |
| TheAgentCompany | — | 8.6% |
| Cybench | — | 12.5% |
| BALROG | — | 32.3% |
| LMArena Search | — | 1006 |
| METR Time Horizons | — | 40.8% |
Reasoning Gemma 2B leads
Gemma 2B: 17.9 (#275), GPT-4o: 9.4 (#338)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GPT-4o |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 989 | 1281 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 93.57 | 128.97 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 0% |
| SimpleBench | — | 17.8% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 4.5% |
| CritPt | — | 0% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 13% |
| EnigmaEval | — | 0.8% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 55.8% |
| DTBench | — | 64.5% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 60.9% |
| LMCA | — | 16.6% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 35.2% | — |
| ForecastBench | — | 57.7 |
| HellaSwag | 71.4% | — |
| LiveBench | — | 55.3% |
| PIQA | 77.3% | — |
| WinoGrande | 65.4% | — |
Math Gemma 2B leads
Gemma 2B: 27.6 (#237), GPT-4o: 10.2 (#303)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GPT-4o |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1009 | 1285 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 0.4% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 6.4% |
| Omni-MATH | — | 29.3% |
| LiveBench Math | — | 49.5% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 53.3% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 0.3% |
| GSM8K | 17.7% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Gemma 2B: —, GPT-4o: 28.8 (#235)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GPT-4o |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU | 42.3% | 88.1% |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 49.2% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | — | 2.7% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 26% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 71.3% |
| Confabulations | — | 15.3% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 9.6% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 52% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1250 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 42.1% | — |
| BoolQ | 69.4% | — |
| TriviaQA | 53.2% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemma 2B: —, GPT-4o: 33.9 (#85)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GPT-4o |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1137 |
| Video-MME | — | 71.9% |
| GeoBench | — | 71% |
| VPCT | — | 40% |
| ScienceQA | — | 88.5% |
Multilingual GPT-4o leads
Gemma 2B: 23.1 (#289), GPT-4o: 43.4 (#181)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GPT-4o |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 958 | 1283 |
| LMArena Chinese | 986 | 1277 |
| LMArena Russian | 937 | 1286 |
| LMArena French | — | 1303 |
| LMArena German | — | 1282 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1257 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1234 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1292 |
Instruction Following GPT-4o leads
Gemma 2B: 48.8 (#297), GPT-4o: 66.8 (#202)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GPT-4o |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 971 | 1278 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 68.6% |
| IFEval | — | 81.7% |
Long Context GPT-4o leads
Gemma 2B: 29.9 (#286), GPT-4o: 39.4 (#174)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GPT-4o |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 981 | 1289 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 66.7% |
Writing & Preference GPT-4o leads
Gemma 2B: 24.1 (#303), GPT-4o: 52.8 (#160)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | GPT-4o |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1002 | 1300 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 986 | 1291 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 945 | 1302 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 81.8% |
| WildBench | — | 82.8% |
| LiveBench Language | — | 47.6% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 2B better than GPT-4o?
Gemma 2B and GPT-4o score almost the same on the Noometry Index (29.1 vs 28.5), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Is Gemma 2B or GPT-4o better for coding?
Gemma 2B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 28.9 versus 25.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 2B and GPT-4o share?
15 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2B has 23 scored results on Noometry and GPT-4o has 72.